Lectionary Calendar
Friday, April 12th, 2024
the Second Week after Easter
We are taking food to Ukrainians still living near the front lines. You can help by getting your church involved.
Click to donate today!

Bible Commentaries
Luke 19

International Critical Commentary NTInternational Critical

Search for…
Enter query below:
Additional Authors

Verses 1-99

19:1-10. § The Visit to Zacchæus, the Tax-collector of Jericho. The on other grounds improbable conjecture, that we have here a distorted variation of the Call of Matthew, the Tax collector of Capernaum, is excluded by the fact that Lk. has recorded that event (5:27-32). Even if the two narratives were far more similar than they are, there would be no good reason for doubting that two such incidents had taken place. The case of Zacchæus illustrates the special doctrine of this Gospel, that no one is excluded from the invitation to the Kingdom of God. The source from which Lk. obtained the narrative seems to have been Aramaic. In time it is closely connected with the preceding section.

1. διήρχετο τὴν Ἰερειχώ. “He was passing through Jericho,” and the meeting took place inside the city. For the verb see on 2:15, and for the constr. comp. 2:35; Acts 12:10, Acts 13:6, Acts 14:24, etc. Apparently the meeting with Zacchæus was what detained Him in Jericho: otherwise He would have gone through without staying: comp. 24:28.

2. ὀνόματι καλούμενος Ζακχαῖος. For the dat. comp. 1:61. The name, which means “pure,” shows him to have been a Jew: Ezra 2:9; Nehemiah 7:14. Tertullian says, Zacchæus, etsi allophylus, fortasse tamen aliqua notitia scripturarum ex commercio Judaico afflatus (Adv. Marcion. 4:37, 1). But the Jews murmured because Jesus lodged with a man that was a sinner. They would have said a heathen, if it had been true. See below on ver. 9. The Clementines make Zacchæus a companion of Peter, who appoints him, much against his wish, to be bishop of Cæsarea (Hom. 3:63; Recog. 3:66); and be Apost. Const. say that he was succeeded by Cornelius (7:46). Clem. Alex. says he was identified with Matthias (Strom. 4:6. p. 579). The Talmud mentions a Zacchæus who lived at Jericho and was father of the celebrated Rabbi Jochanan. He might be of the same family as this Zacchæus. The use of�

καὶ αὐτὸς ἧν�

3. ἐζήτει ἰδεῖν. Not like Herod (23:8), but like the Greeks (John 12:21). He had heard of Him, and perhaps as mixing freely with publicans and sinners. Fama notum vultu noscere cupiebat (Grotius). For the indic. after τίς dependent comp. Acts 21:33.

οὐκ ἠδύνατο�Acts 12:14, Acts 12:22:11; John 21:6; Hebrews 5:7. His being unable to free himself from the throng is not the meaning of the�

4. εἰς τὸ ἔμπροσθεν.. Strengthens the προδραμών. He ran on to that part of the city which was in front of Christ’s route. There is nothing to show that he wished to hide, and that Christ’s call to him was like His making the woman with the issue disclose her act (Trench). On the other hand, there is no evidence that he braved the derision of the crowd. We may say, however, that no thought of personal dignity or propriety deterred him from his purpose.

TR. omits εἰς τό, which is sufficiently attested by א B L, processit in priore et (e), antecedens ab ante (d), D having προλαβών for προδραμών.

συκομορέαν. “A fig-mulberry,” quite a different tree from the fig and the mulberry and the common sycamore: Its fruit is like the fig, and its leaf like the mulberry, and hence the name. The συκάμινος of 17:6 is commonly held to be the mulberry, but may be another name for the fig-mulberry, as Groser thinks. The fig-mulberry “recalls the English oak, and its shade is most pleasing. It is consequently a favourite wayside tree. … It is very easy to climb, with its short trunk, and its wide lateral branches forking out in all directions” (Tristram, Nat. Hist. of B. P. 398).

The MSS. vary much, but all early uncials except A have -μορέα and not -μοραία; and -μορέα is much better attested than -μωρέα or -μωραία. The common form is συκόμορος.

With ἐκείης sc. ὁδοῦ comp. ποίας 5:19.

For the sudden change of subject,�John 4:8, John 7:32.

5. ζακχαῖε. There is no need to assume that Jesus had supernatural knowledge of the name: John 4:17, John 4:18 is not parallel Jesus might hear the people calling to Zacchæus, or might enquire. And He seems not to use His miraculous power of knowledge when He could obtain information in the usual way (Mark 8:5; John 11:34). The explanation that He thereby showed Zacchæus that He knew all about him, is not adequate. Would Zacchæus have inferred this from being addressed by name?

σπεύσας κατάβηθι. He had made to to see Christ: he must make haste to to receive Him. Accepit plus quam sperabat, qui, quod potuit, fecit (Maldon.). As in the case of Nathanael (John 1:47), Jesus knew the goodness of the man’s heart. Here supernatural knowledge, necessary for Christ’s work, is quite in place. For σπεύδειν see on 2:16.

σήμερον γὰρ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ σου. First, with emphasis. “This very day; in thy house.” For δεῖ of the Divine counsels see on 4:43. Taken in conjunction with καταλῦσαι (ver. 7), μεῖναι possibly means “to pass the night.” But neither word necessarily means staying for more than a long rest.

7. πάντες διεγόγγυζον. Note the characteristic πάντες, and comp. 5:30, 15:2. It was not jealousy, but a sense of outraged propriety, which made them all murmur.

Παρὰ ἁμαρτωλῷ. First, with emphasis. They allude, not to the personal charact of Zacchæus, but to his calling. For παρά unelided before a vowel see small pint on 18:27, and Gregory, Prolegom. p. 95.

καταλῦσαι. Only here and 9:12 in N.T. has καταλύω the classical meaning of “loosing one’s garments and resting from a journey”: comp. Genesis 19:2, Genesis 19:24:23, Genesis 19:25; Ecclus. 14:25, 27, 36:31. Elsewhere in N.T. it means “throw down, destroy” (21:6; Acts 5:38, Acts 6:14, etc.).

8. σταθείς. Perhaps indicates a set attitude: see on 18:11. It is a solemn act done with formality. The narrative represents this declaration as the immediate result of personal contact with the goodness of Christ. He is overwhelmed by Christ’s condescension in coming to him, and is eager to make a worthy acknowledgment. That he was stung by the reproach παρὰ ἁμαρτωλῷ�

εἴ τινός τι ἐσυκοφάντησα. The indic. shows that he is not in doubt about past malpractices: “if, as I know is the case, I have,” etc. Comp. Romans 5:17; Colossians 2:20, Colossians 3:1. For συκοφαντεῖν see on 3:14, the only other place in N.T. in which the verb occurs: in LXX it is not rare. The constr. τινός τι is on the analogy of�

ἀποδίδωμι τετραπλοῦν. This was almost the extreme penalty imposed by the Law, when a man was compelled to make reparation for a deliberate act of destructive robbery (Exodus 22:1; 2 Samuel 12:6). But sevenfold was sometimes exacted (Proverbs 6:31). If the stolen property had not been consumed, double was to be paid (Exodus 22:4, Exodus 22:7). When the defrauder confessed and made voluntary restitution, the whole amount stolen, with a fifth added was sufficient (Leviticus 6:5; Numbers 5:7). Samuel promises only simple restitution if anything is proved against him (1 Samuel 12:3). Zacchæus is willing to treat his exactions as if they had been destructive robberies. In thus stripping himself of the chief part even of his honestly gained riches he illustrates 18:27. Ecce enim camelus, deposita gibbi sarcina, per foramen acus transit, hot est dives et publicanus, relicto onere divitiarum, contempto sensu fraudium, angustam, portam arctamque viam quæ ad vitam ducit ascendit (Bede).

9. πρὸς αὐτόν. Although Christ uses the third person, this probably means “unto him” (May. Hahn) rather than “in reference to him” (Grot. Nösg. Godet): see on 18:9. Ewald reads πρὸς αὑτόν, like πρὸς ἑαυτόν, 18:11, as if Jesus were thinking aloud. It is doubtful whether αὑτόν for ἑαυτόν occurs in N.T.

To avoid the difficulty some texts have the plur. πρὸς αὐτούς (R), ad illos (a b c ff2 i l s), and some omit (d e, Cypr.). Some MSS of Vulg. have ad eos or ad illos for ad eum.

ὅτι Σήμερον. The ὅτι is merely recitative and is not to translated. The σήμερον confirms the view that δίδωμι and�

σωτηρία … ἐγένετο. A favourite constr. with Lk. See on it 6:36 “Only on this occasion did Jesus offer Himself as a guest, although He sometimes accepted invitations. Just as it was to a despised schismatic (John 4:26), and to a despised outcast from the synagogue (John 9:37), that He made a spontaneous revelation of His Messiahship, so it is a despised tax-collector that He selects for this spontaneous visit. In each case He knew that the recipient had a heart to welcome His gift: and it is in this welcome, and not in the mere visit, that the σωτηρία consisted.1

That τῷ οἴκῳ τούτῳ is said rather than τῷ�Acts 20:35).

καθότι καὶ αὐτὸς υἱὸς Ἀβραάμ. This is conclusive as to Z being a Jew. The words cannot be understood exclusively in a spiritual sense, as Cyprian seems to take them (EP. 63:4, ed. Hartel). Chrysostom points out the moral sonship: Abraham offer his heir to the Lord, Zacchæus his inheritance. Comp. 13:16, and see Weiss, L. J. 2. p. 438, Eng. tr. 3. p. 221. For καθότι, which is peculiar to Lk., see small print on 1:7. The meaning is that he also, as much as any one else, is an Israelite. “His detested calling has not cancelled his birthright. My visit to him, and his receiving salvation, are entirely in harmony with the Divine Will” (ver. 5).

10. ἦλθεν. First with emphasis: “He came for this very purpose.” The γάρ explains σωτηρία ἐγένετο: salvation to such as Z. is the object of His Epiphany. For the neut. of a collective whole, τὸ�John 6:37, John 6:17:2, John 6:24; and for the thought, Luke 15:6, Luke 15:9, Luke 15:32; Ezekiel 34:16. The expression is no evidence that Zacchæus was a heathen. Comp. τὰ�Matthew 10:6, Matthew 15:24).

11-28. § The Parable of the Pounds. It is probable that this is distinct from the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30; comp. Mark 13:34-36). It is more likely that Jesus should utter somewhat similar parables on different occasions than that Mt. or Lk. should have made very serious confusion as to the details of the parable as well as regards the time and place of its delivery.

Here Jesus is a approaching Jerusalem, but has not yet entered it in triumph: apparently He is still in Jericho. In Mt. He is on the Mount of Olives a day or two after the triumphal entry. Here He addresses a mixed company publicly. In Mt. He is speaking privately to His disciples (24:3). Besides the difference in detail where the two narratives are parallel, them is a great deal in Lk. which is not represented in Mt. at all. The principal items are: (1) the introduction, ver. 11; (2) the high birth of the chief agent and his going into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, ver. 12; (3) his citizens hating him and sending an ambassage after him to repudiate him, ver. 14; (4) the signal vengeance taken upon these enemies, ver. 27; (5) the conclusion, Ver. 28. Strauss supposes that Lk has mixed up two parables, the Parable of the Pounds, which is only another version of the Parable of the Talents in Mt., and another which might be called the Parable of the Rebellious Citizens, consisting of vv. 12, 14, 15, 27. Without denying the possibility of this hypothesis, one may assert that it is unnecessary. As regards the Talents and the Pounds, Chrysostom pronounces them to be distinct, while Augustine implies that they are so, for he makes no attempt to harmonize them in his De Consensu Evangelistarum. Even in the parts that are common to the two parables the differences are very considerable. (1) In the Talents we have a householder leaving home for a time, in the Pounds a nobleman going in quest of a crown; (2) the Talents are unequally distributed, the Pounds equally; (3) the sums entrusted differ enormously in amount; (4) in the Talents the rewards are the same, in the Pounds they differ and are proportionate to what has been gained; (5) in the Talents the unprofitable servant is severely punished, in the Pounds he is merely deprived of his pound. Out of about 302 words in Mt. and 286 in Lk., only about 66 words or parts of words are common to the two. An estimate of the probabilities on each side seems to be favourable to the view that we have accurate reports of two different parables, and not two reports of the same parable, one of which, if not both, must be very inaccurate. And, while both parables teach that we must make good use of the gifts entrusted to us, that in Mt. refers to those gifts which are unequally distributed, that in Lk. to those in which all share alike. See Wright, Synopsis, § 138, p. 127.

The lesson of the parable before us, is twofold. To the disciples of all classes it teaches the necessity of patiently waiting and actively working for Christ until He comes again. To the Jews it gives a solemn warning respecting the deadly opposition which they are now exhibiting, and which will be continued even after His departure. There will be heavy retribution for those who persistently reject their lawfully appointed King. This portion of the parable is of special interest, because there is little doubt that it was suggested by contemporary history. Herod the Great, appointed procurator of Galilee by Julius Cæsar b.c. 47 and tetrarch by Antony b.c. 41, went to Rome b.c. 40 to oppose the claims of Antigonus, and was made king of Judæa by the senate (Jos. Ant. 14:7, 3, 9:2, 13:1, 14:4; B. J. 1:14, 4). His son Archelaus in like manner went to Rome to obtain the kingdom which his father, by a change in his will, had left to him instead of to Antipas. The Jews revolted and sent an ambassage of fifty to oppose him at Rome. Augustus, after hearing them and the Jews on the spot, confirmed Herod’s will, but did not allow Archelaus the title of king until he had proved his worthiness. This he never did; but he got his “kingdom” with the title of ethnarch (Ant. 17:8, 1, 9:3, 11:4; B. J. 2:6, 1, 3). All this had taken place b.c. 4, in which year Antipas also went to Rome to urge his own claims against those of Archelaus. His more famous attempt to obtain the title of king did not take place until after this, and cannot be alluded to here. The remarkable feature of the opposing embassy makes the reference to Archelaus highly probable; and Jericho, which he had enriched with buildings, would suggest his case as an illustration. But the reference is by some held to be fictitious, by others is made a reason for suspecting that the author of this detail is not Christ but the Evangelist (Weiss).

11. Ἀκουόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ταῦτα. These words connect the parable closely with what precedes. The scene is still Jericho, in or near the house of Zacchæus; and, as ταῦτα seems to refer to the saying about σωτηρία (vv. 9, 10), αὐτῶν probably refers to the disciples and those with Zacchæus. The belief that the Kingdom was close at hand, and that Jesus was now going in triumph to Jerusalem, was probably general among those who accompanied Him, and the words just uttered night seem to confirm it. “But because the heard these things” (Mey.) is, however, not quite the meaning: rather, “And as they head” (AV. RV.); hæc illis audientibus (Vulg.).

Here Cod. Bezae has one of its attempts to reproduce the gen. abs. in Latin: audientium autem eorum; comp. 3:15, 9:43, 21:5, 26, etc.

προσθεὶς εἶπεν παραβολήν. Not, “He spoke, and added a parable” to what He spoke; but, “He added and spoke a parable” in connexion with what had preceded. Moris est Domino, præmissum sermonem parabolis adfirmare subjectis (Bede). It is a Hebraistic construction: comp. Genesis 38:5; Job 29:1; Genesis 25:1. In Luke 20:11, Luke 20:12; Acts 12:3; Genesis 4:2, Genesis 8:12 we have another form of the same idiom, προσέθετο πέμψαι, etc. See also on 6:39 for εἶπεν παραβολήν.

The Latin equivalents are interesting: addidit dicens (a), adjecit et dixit (e), addidit dicere (s), adjiciens dixit (Vulg.). See also 20:11.

διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς εἶναι Ἰ. About six hours’ march; 150 stades (Jos. B. J. iv. 8. 3), or about 18 miles. The goal was almost in sight the arrival could not be much longer delayed.

παραχπῆμα μέλλει …�Acts 1:6.

12. εὐγενής. In a literal sense here and 1 Corinthians 1:26; comp Job 1:3: in a figurative sense Acts 17:11; comp. 4 Mac. 6:5, 9:23, 27. The μακράν, which is probably an adj. as in 15:3 has obvious reference to παραχρῆμα: the distance would exclude an immediate return. Note the τις.

λαβεῖν ἑαυτῷ βασιλείαν. If we had not the illustrations from contemporary history, this would be a surprising feature in the parable. He is a vassal of high rank going to a distant suzeraim to obtain royal authority over his fellow-vassals. For ὑποστρέψαι see small print on 1:56; it tells us that the desired βασιλεία is at the starting point, not at a distance.

13. He plans that, during his absence, servants of his private household shall be tested, with a view to their promotion when he is, appointed to be king.

δέκα δούλους ἑαυτοῦ. “Ten bond-servants of his own.” It does not follow, because we have not δέκα τῶν δ. αὐτοῦ, that he had only ten slaves. This would require τοὺς δ. δ., and would be very improbable; for an Oriental noble would have scores of slaves. The point of ἑαυτοῦ (? “his household slaves”) is, that among them, if anywhere, he would be likely to find fidelity to his interests. As he merely wishes to test them, the sum committed to each is small,—about £4. In the Talents the householder divides the whole of his property (τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτοῦ) and hence the sums entrusted to each slave are very large.

πραγματεύσασθε. “Carry on business,” especially as a banker or a trader: here only in N.T., and in LXX on Daniel 8:27 and some texts of 1 Kings 9:19. Vulg. has negotiamini (not occupate), which Wic. renders “chaffare.” The “occupy” of Rhem. and AV. comes from Cov. and Cran., while Tyn. has “buy and sell.” We have a similar use of “occupy” Ezekiel 27:9, Ezekiel 27:16, Ezekiel 27:19, Ezekiel 27:21, Ezekiel 27:22, where Vulg. has negotiatio and negotiator: comp. “occupy their business in great waters” (Psalms 107:23).

Latimer exhibits the same use of “occupy”; and in a letter of Thomas Cromwell to Michael Throgmorton, a.d. 1537, he calls Pole “a merchant and occupier of all deceits” (Froude, His. of Eng. ch. xiv.). “Occupy till I come” is now misunderstood to mean “keep possession till I come.”

WH. are alone in reading πραγματεύσασθαι here. All other editors make the verb 2nd. pers. plur. imper. not infin. WH. regard the decision difficult both here and 14:17, but prefer the infin. here as “justified by St. Luke’s manner of passing from oratio obliqua to oratio recta” (2. p. 309).

ἐν ᾧ ἔρχομαι. “During the time in which I am coming,” i.e. the time until the return. For ἔρχομαι in the sense of “come back” comp. John 4:16 and esp. 21:22, 23. The meaning “to be on the journey” (Oosterz. Godet) is impossible for ἔρχεσθαι. The reading ἕως (TR. with E etc.) is an obvious correction of ἐν ᾧ (א A B D K L R etc.).

14. While the δοῦλοι represent the disciples, the πολῖται represent the Jew. The Jews hated Jesus without cause, ἐμίσησάν μεδωρεάν (John 15:25; Psalms 68:5): but they had reason enough for hating Archelaus, who had massacred about 3000 of them at the first Passover after his accession (Ant. xvii. 9. 3; B. J. ii. 1. 3).

οὐ θέλομεν τοῦτον. They state no reasons: stat pro ratione voluntas. The τοῦτον is contemptuous (istum), or at least expresses alienation: “he is no man of ours.” So the Jews, of Christ

15. For καὶ�

ἵνα γνοῖ. For this form comp. Mark 5:43 and 9:30. TR. with A etc. has γνῷ in all three places. The τίς after γνοῖ (A R, syrr. Arm. Goth. Vulg.) is not genuine: om. א B D L Boh. Aeth. d e.

τί διεπραγματεύσαντο. “What business they had done”: here only in bibl. Grk. In Dion. Hal. iii. 72, it means “attempt to execute.” He wants to know the result of their trafficking. But the word does not assume that they have “gained by trading” (AV. RV.); and hence negotiatus esset (Vulg.) is better than lucratus esset (f).

16. ἡ μνᾶ σου προσηργάσατο. “Thy pound worked out in addition, won”: modeste lucrum acceptum fert herili pecuniæ, non industriæ suæ (Grot). Comp. οὐκ ἐγὼ δὲ�1 Corinthians 15:10): see also 1 Corinthians 4:7. The verb occurs here only in bibl. Grk. Comp. Matthew 25:16

17. εὖγε. In replies approving what has been said this is classical; but the reading is doubtful: εὖγε (B D, Latt., Orig. Ambr.), εὖ, possibly from Matthew 15:21 (א A R etc., Syrr.).

ἐν ἐλαχίστῶ πιστὸς ἐγένου. “Thou didst prove faithful in a very little”: comp. 16:10. The management of £4 was a small matter.

ἴσθι ἐξουσίαν ἔχων. The periphrastic pres. imper. is not common in N.T. Comp. Genesis 1:6; Burton., § 97. Lk. is probably translating: Mt. is much more classical: ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω (25:21). For ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν comp. Matthew 7:29.

18. With ἐποίησεν πέντε μνᾶς comp. εἰ μὴ εἴ τις αὐτῶν�

ἣν εἶχον�Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 4:8; Hebrews 9:27 the verb is used of what is “stored up” and awaits us in the future: here only in a literal sense.

σοιδαρίῳ. A Latinism: sudarium (Acts 19:12; John 11:44, John 20:7). Comp.�Mark 15:39), κοδράντης (Matthew 5:26), etc.

21. αὐστηρός. Here only in N.T. comp. 2 Mac. 14:30, and see Trench, Syn. xiv. The word originally means “rough to the taste, stringent.” It is in this servant’s plea and in the reply to it that the resemblance between the two parables of the Pounds and of the Talents is closest.

αἴρεις ὅ οὐκ ἔθηκας. Perhaps a current proverbial expression for a grasping person. We need not decide whether he means, “If I had gained anything, you would have taken it,” or, “If I had lost it, you would have held me responsible.” The general sense is “You are a strict man; and I have taken care that you should get back the exact deposit, neither more nor less.”

22. κρίνω σε. “Do I judge thee”; te judico (f Vulg.), condemno (e). Most editors prefer κρινῶ, “will I judge” (AV. RV.); judicabo (a d). But Tyn. has “judge I thee” and Luth. richte ich dich. Hist. pres. (λέγει, 13:8, 16:7, 29) is very rare in Lk.

The Latin Versions vary greatly in rendering πονηρέ; inique (d), infidelis (e ff2 i r), crudelis (b), nequa et piger (f), infidelis et piger (q), infidelis et male (a)nequam (Vulg.). Comp. Matthew 18:32. The piger comes from Matthew 25:26, πονηρὲ δοῦλα καὶ ὀκνηρέ.

23. ἐπὶ τράπεζαν. “On a banker’s table.” Here the interrogation ends, and κἀγώ begins a declaratory sentence. It would have been very little trouble to put it in a bank. There the money would have been as safe as in the napkin, and would have borne interest. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 580.

The often quoted saying, “Show yourselves tried bankers,” Γίνεσθε τραπεζῖται δόκιμοι, may easily be a genuine utterance of Christ. But if it is a mere adaptation, it comes from Matthew 25:27 rather than from Lk. See Resch, Agrapha, pp. 118, 234; Wsctt. Int. to Gosp. App. C.

τόκῳ. In N.T. the word occurs only in these parables; but is freq. in LXX; Deuteronomy 23:19; Leviticus 25:36, Leviticus 25:37; Exodus 22:25, etc. The notion that money, being a dead thing, ought not to breed (τεκεῖν, τόκος), augmented the prejudice of the ancients against interest Aristotle condemns it as παρὰ φύσιν (Pol. i. 10. 4; comp. Eth. Nic. iv. 1. 40). Cicero represents Cato as putting it on a level with murder (De Off. ii. 25. 89). “The breed of barren metal” (Shaks.).

ἂν αὐτὸ ἔπραξα. The protasis is readily understood from the previous question: comp. Hebrews 10:2. For this use of πράσσειν see on 3:13.

24. τοῖς παρεστῶσιν. His attendants, or body-guard, or courtiers: comp. 1 Kings 10:8; Esther 4:5. The man who had proved most efficient in service is rewarded with an additional sum with which to traffick for his sovereign.

25. The subject of εἶπαν and the meaning of αὐτῷ are uncertain. The common interpretation is that the attendants who have this order here express their surprise to the master who gave it; i.e. the remonstrance is part of the parable. But it is possible that Lk. is here recording an interruption on the part of the audience, and thus lets us see with what keen interest they have listened to the narrative. It is the audience who remonstrate with Christ for giving the story such a turn. They think that He is spoiling the parable in assigning the unused pound to the servant who has most and therefore seems to need it least (see on 20:15). But in any case the remonstrance serves to give to the declaration which follows. Comp. Peter’s interruption and Christ’s apparent ignoring of it 12:41, 42; and again 18:28, 29. In all the cases there is an indirect answer. A general principle is stated which covers the point in question.

Bleek rejects ver. 25 as an interpolation: om. D 69, b d e ff2q2, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. The difficulty might cause the omission. The insertion of γάρ after λέγω in ver. 26 (A D R, Syrr. Goth.) is due to a similar cause. Both omission and insertion may he influenced by Matthew 25:28, Matthew 25:29.

26. λέγω ὑμῖν. Whose words are these? The answer will partly depend upon the view taken of ver. 25. If the interruption is made by the king’s attendants, then ver. 26, like ver. 24 and ver. 27, gives the words of the king. But if the interruption comes from Christ’s audience, then ver. 26 may be His reply to the audience; after which He finishes the parable with the king’s words in ver. 27. The λέγω ὑμῖν does not prove that Christ is giving these words as His own: comp. 14:24. But in any case, either in His own person or in that of the king in the parable, Jesus is stating a principle which answers the objection in ver. 25. In Matthew 25:29 this principle is uttered by the householder in the parable without λέγω ὑμῖν.

ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ μὴ ἔχοντος. With this apparent paradox comp. 8:18, when an unused gift is spoken of, not as ὃ ἔχει, but as ὃ δοκεῖ ἔχειν. He alone possesses, who uses and enjoys his possessions.

27. πλὴν τοὺς ἐχθρούς μου τούτους. The τούτους represents the enemies as present to the thoughts of the audience: comp. τούτους in ver. 15. It is possible to take the pronoun with what follows, as in Syr-Sin. “Bring hither mine enemies, those who would not,” etc. And this makes one more witness for the reading ἐκείνους (A D R etc., Latt. Syrr. Goth.), which almost all editors reject as a correction of τούτους (א B K L M R, Aegyptt.). For πλήν comp. 18:8.

κατασφάξατε αὐτοὺς ἔμπροσθέν μου. Comp. ἔσφαξεν Σαμουὴλ τὸν Ἀγὰγ ἐνώπιον Κυρίου (1 Samuel 15:33). The punishment of rebellious subjects and active opponents is far more severe than that of neglectful servants. The compound κατασφάζω occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is not rare in LXX. It means “hew them down, slay them utterly.” The destruction of Jerusalem and the doom of all who deliberately rebel against Christ are here Foreshadowed. Augustine more than once points to this sentence in answer to the objection that the severe God of the O.T. cannot be identical with the God of Love in the N.T. In the Gospels, as in the Law, the severity of God’s judgments against wilful disobedience is plainly taught. Comp. Con. Faust. xii. 14. 19.

The nobleman, who goes on a long journey and returns a king, is christ. He leaves behind Him servants of various degrees of merit, and enemies. When the King returns, each of these is rewarded or punished according to his deserts; and the rewards are larger opportunities of service. There is no special meaning in ten, which is a round number; nor in three, which gives a sufficiently representative classification. And it may be doubted whether there is any special meaning in the transfer of the and from the unprofitable to the most profitable servant. The point is that to neglect opportunites is to lose them; and that to make the most of opportunities is to gain others. The main lesson of the parable is the long period of christ’s absence, during which there will be abundant time for both service and rebellion. There is not to be, as the disciples fancied, immediate triumph and joy for all; but, first a long time of probation, and then triumph and joy for those only who have earned them, and in exact proportion to their merits.

28. Historical conclusion, corresponding to the historical introduction in ver. 11.

ἐπορεύετο ἔμποσθεν. “He went on before.” Although the αὐτῶν is not expressed, this probably means “in front of the disciples”: comp. Mark 10:32. But ἔμπροσθεν may = εἰς τὸ ἔμπροσθεν (ver. 4), as ὀπίσω = εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω (Matthew 24:18): in which case the meaning would be, “He went forwards” from Jericho towards Jerusalem. With�

D omits ἔμροσθεν and a d have simply ibat; c ff2 i l q r s abiit, while Vulg. has præcedebat. D inserts δέ after�

29-40. The Triumphal Procession to Jerusalem. Matthew 21:1-11; Mark 11:1-11. Comp. John 12:1-19. “The Journeyings towards Jerusalem” are over, and Lk. now permanently rejoins the other Gospels in describing the concluding scenes. As compared with them, he has both additions and omissions. He omits the supper at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, which Mt. and Mk. place without date after the triumphal entry, but which Jn. states to have taken place before the entry. Lk. has already given a similar incident, a meal at which Jesus is a guest and a woman anoints Him (7:36-50), and perhaps for that reason omits the supper at Bethany. The chronology may be tentatively arranged thus. Jn. tells us that Jesus arrived at Bethany six days before the Passover, viz. Nisan 8, a day on which pilgrims often arrived at Jerusalem, as Josephus states. Assuming that the year is a.d. 30, Nisan 8 would be Friday, March 31. Jesus and His disciples reached Bethany that afternoon, either before the Sabbath began, or after having done no more than “a sabbath day’s journey” after it began. But the chronology of these last days, as of the whole of our Lord’s life, is uncertain. At Bethany He would part from the large caravan of pilgrims in whose company He had been travelling. Most of these would press on to Jerusalem. See Wieseler, Chron. Syn. v. 2, Eng. tr. p. 358, and comp. Caspari, Chron. Einl. § 165, Eng. tr. p. 217.

29. βηθφαγή. Accent, derivation, and site are all doubtful. But Βηθφαγή; is preferable to Βηθφαγῆ; the meaning is probably “House of unripe figs,” and the situation must have been near Bethany. See Robinson, Res. in pal. i. 433; Stanley, Sin. & Pal. p. 422; D. B.2 s.v. Caspari, following Lightfoot, contends that Bethphage was not a village, but a whole district, including Bethany and all that lay between it and Jerusalem. The meaning in this case would be, that Jesus drew near to the district Bethphage and to the particular spot in it called Bethany (Chron. Einl. §144, 145, Eng. tr. pp. 189-191). The passage is worthy of study. In N.T. Bethphage is mentioned in these three narratives only; in O.T. not at all. The Talmud says that it was east of the walls of Jerusalem. Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome knew it, but do not describe its position. Its being placed first points to its being more important than Bethany.

The derivation of Bethany is still more uncertain, but its site is well ascertained. The conjecture “House of dates” is confirmed by the adjacent “House of figs” and “Mount of olives.” The names point to the ancient fertility of the neighbourhood.

τὸ καλούμενον Ἐλαιῶν. Here also there is doubt about the accent, which in this case, as in κρίνω (ver. 22), affects the meaning. In Mt. and Mk. the article, τῶν Ἐλαιῶν, shows that the word is gen. plur.; but here, with Lach. Tisch. Treg. and others, we may write Ἐλαιών, as nom. sing. In that awe the name is treated as a sound and not declined. In 21:37 the same doubt arises. Acts 1:12 We have Ἐλαιῶνος. as in Ant. vii. 9. 2, from Ἐλαιών, Olivetum, “an olive-grove, Olivet.” But ver. 37 and the parallels in Mt. and Mk. render Ἐλαιῶν the more probable here (WH. 2. App. p. 158: so also Hahn, wittichen, and Wetzel). The fact that Ἐλαιῶν commonly has the article is not decisive (Field, otium Norvic. 3. p. 53), Jos. B. J. ii. 13. 5, v. 2. 3, vi. 2. 8 are all doubtful; but both Bekker and Dindorf edit Ἐλαιῶν in all three places. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 208.

In ver. 29 note the characteristic ἐγένετο and καλούμενον: In the latter we have an indication that Lk. is writing for those not familiar with Palestine: comp. 21:37, 22:1. Neither occurs in the parallels in Mt.and Mk. Note also ὡς = “when” and ἤγγισεν.

30. Ὑπάγετε. So also Mk., while Mt. has his favourite πορεύεσθε. The details which Mk. alone records render the conjecture that Peter was one of the two who were sent reasonable.

τὴν κατέναντι κώμην. Whether Bethany, or Bethphage, or an unnamed village, is quite uncertain. This compound preposition is not found in profane writers, but is common in bibl. Grk. (Matthew 21:2; Mark 11:2; Romans 4:17; 2 Corinthians 12:19; Exodus 19:2, Exodus 32:5, etc). L & S Lex. quote C. I. 2905 D. 13.

ἐφʼ ὂν οὐδεὶς πώποτε�Deuteronomy 21:3; Numbers 19:2; 1 Samuel 6:7. The birth of a virgin and the burial in a new tomb are facts of he same kind.

31. οὕτως ἐρεῖτε ὅτι. Vulg. and AV. make ὅτι the answer to Διὰ τί; So also Mey. and Hahn. But in Matthew 21:3 we have ὅτι and no διὰ τί; In both places the ὅτι is recitative. Comp. 7:16, 22:70.

Ὁ κύριος. This rather implies that the owner has some knowledge of Jesus. Lk. omits the assurance that the owner will send the colt. That the whole had been previously arranged by Jesus is Possible, for He gives no intimation that it was not so. But the impression produced by the narratives is that the knowledge is supernatural, which on so momentous an occasion would be in harmony with His purpose. Comp. John 14:29, John 16:32, John 21:8, and see on Luke 22:10, Luke 22:13, Luke 22:34. As Godet points out, this prophetic knowledge must not be confounded with omniscience.

32. καθὼς εἶπεν. “Exactly as He said.” This καθώς, in slightly different connexions, is in all three narratives. Mt. has “they did even as He appointed”; Mk., “they said to them even He said”; Lk., “they found even as He said.” They could not have done and said just what He had commanded, unless the facts had been such as He had foretold. Lk. and Mk., as writing for Gentiles, take no notice of the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9, which both Mt. and Jn. quote.

Justin, in order to make the incident a fulfilment of Genesis 49:11, “Binding his foal unto the vine,” etc., says that the πῶλος was πρὸς ἄμπελον δεδεμένος (Apol. i. 32). Syr-Sin. omits most of v. 33.

33. οἱ κύριοι αὐτοῦ. The owner of the colt and those with him: τινες τῶν ἐκεῖ ἑστηκότων (Mk.). In all three narratives Jesus uses the singular. A fiction would have made exact correspondence by representing the remonstrance as coming from one person only. Mt. omits the fulfilment of the predicted remonstrance.

35. αὐτῶν τὰ ἱμάτια. The pronoun stands first with emphasis: they did not spare their own chief garments. Comp. ἑαυτῶν in ver. 36.

In both verses readings vary: here TR. with A R etc. has ἐαυτῶν, while א B D L, Orig. have αὐτῶν: there TR. with א D has αὐτῶν, while A B K have ἑαυτῶν. The best editors are unanimous for αὐτῶν here.

ἐπεβίβασαν. Lk. alone tells us of their placing Him on the colt. The other three merely state that He sat on it.1 Nowhere in O.T. do we find kings thus mounted. While there is much in this triumphal precession that tells of royally, there is also something which adds, “My Kingdom is not of this world” (Godet). Against carnal chiliastic notions of the Kingdom this entry on “a colt the foal of an ass” is an ironia realis ordained by the Lord Himself (Nösgen, Gesh. J. Chr. p. 506). For ἐπιβιβάζω comp. 10:34; Acts 23:24: it is not rare in LXX.

36. ὑπεστρώννυον τὰ ἱμάτια. Change of subject: it is the multitude that does this. Robinson tells how the people of Bethlehem spread their garments before the horses of the English consul and his suite (Res. in Pal. i. p. 473): other instances in Wetst. on Matthew 21:8. Lk. omits the branches strewn in the way. All three omit the multitude with palm branches coming from Jerusalem to meet the procession (John 12:13, John 12:18).

37. Here every word differs from the wording of the others, although the substance is the same. As marks of style note ἅπαν, πλῆθος, φωνῇ μεγάλῃ, πασῶν ὧν. The ἤδη is amphibolous, and may be taken either with ἐγγίζοντος (AV.) or with πρὸς τῇ καταβάσει (RV.): see on 17:22 and 18:31. In either case πρὸς τῇ καταβάσει is epoexegetic of ἐγγίζοντος, “When He was drawing nigh, viz. at the descent,” etc. It is at the top of this descent that that the S.E. corner of the “City of David” (but not the temple) comes in sight; and the view thus opening may have prompted (ἤρξαντο) this “earliest hymn of Christian devotion” (Stanley). Many of the pilgrims were from Galilee, where Jesus still had enthusiastic friends. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 232.

The reading πρὸς τὴν κατάβασιν (D) is an obvious correction. D M L with a d e Syrr. Aeth. omit ἤδη. In both readings D is supported by Syr-Sin., “When they came near to the descent,” etc. With this plur. comp. Syr-Sin. in ver. 28.

The Latin Versions are interesting in what follows. Nearly all Mss. of Vulg. have omnes turbæ descendentium, which is a mere slip for discentium (τῶν μαθητῶν), a reading preserved in G M of Vulg. as in Codd. Am. and Brix. Discentes was substituted for discipuli possibly to show that a larger body than the Twelve was meant. Cod. Bezae has discentes John 6:66, John 21:2, while almost all have it John 21:12, and c has it Luke 22:45. comp. Tert. præscr. 3.

δυνάμεων. The healing of Bartimæus and the raising of Lazarus would be specially mentioned.

For δυνάμεων D has γεινομένων, quæ fiebant (d), factis (1); om. Syr-Cur.. Syr-Sin.

38. Εὐλογημένος … ἐν ὀνόματι κυρίου. In these words all four agree. Lk. and Jn. add ὁ βασιλεύς which in Mk. is represented by ἡ ἐρχομένη βασιλεία and in Mt. Ὡσαννὰ τῷ υἱῷ Δαυείδ Lk. substitutes δόξα (more intelligible to Gentiles) for the Hosanna of the other three. See on 2:14. “He that cometh in the name of the Lord” means God’s representative, envoy, or agent. The words ἐν οὐρανῷ εἰρήνη are in Lk. alone, and are perhaps part of his paraphrase of Hosanna. Heaven is the abode of God, and there is peace there because man is reconciled to God, or perhaps because peace is now prepared for man in the heavenly Kingdom.

These cries (comp. 4:34) clearly recognize Jesus as the Messiah. The Psalms from which they come were sung at the Passover and at the F. of Tabernacles, and hence were familiar to the people. Psa_118. is said by some to have been written for the F. of Tabernacles after the Return, by others for the dedication of the second temple. The supposition that the Evangelists have confounded the Passover with the F. of Tabernacles, and have transferred to the former what was customary at the latter, is gratuitous. These responses from the Hallel were sung, not only at the Passover, but at other Feasts; and the waving of palm branches was not confined to the F. of Tabernacles (1 Mac. 13:5). see Edersh. L. & T. 2. p. 371.

Hase calls attention to the audacity of the whole transaction. Jesus and His disciples were under the ban of the hierarchy. The Sanhedrin had issued a decree that, if any one knew where He was, he should give information, that they might arrest Him (John 11:57). And yet here are His disciples bringing Him in triumph into Jerusalem, and the populace enthusiastically joining with them. Moreover, all this had been arranged by Jesus Himself, when He sent for the colt. What He had hitherto concealed, or obscurely indicated, or revealed only to a chosen few, He now, seeing that the fulness of time is come, makes known to the whole world. He publicly claims to be the Messiah. This triumphal procession is the Holy One of God making solemn entry into the Holy City. Hase is justly severe on Strauss for the way in which he changed his view from edition to edition: the truth being that the triumphal entry is an historical fact, too well attested to be discredited (Gesch. Jesu, §94).

39, 40. Here Lk. is alone, not only in wording, but in substance. The remonstrance of these Pharisees is intrinsically probable. Having no power to check the multitude (John 12:19), and perhaps not daring to attempt it, they call on Jesus to do so. Possibly they wished to fasten the responsibility upon Him, and they may have been sent by the Sanhedrin to spy and report. This Messianic homage was offensive to them, and they feared a tumult which might cause trouble with Pilate.

39.�Matthew 12:38, etc.). But comp. 21:7; Mark 4:38.

Syr-Sin. has, “Some of the people from amongst the crowd said unto Him Good Teacher, rebuke Thy disciples, that they shout not.”

40. Christ’s reply is of great sternness. It implies that their failure to appreciate the significance of the occasion is amazing in its fatuity. It is not likely that there is any reference to the crashing of the stones at the downfall of Jerusalem (Lange, Oosterzee). Perhaps ow οἱ λίθοι κράξουσιν was already a proverbial expression. Comp. λίθος ἐκ τοίχου βοήσεται (Habakkuk 2:11): Parietes, medius fidius, ut mihi videntur, tibi gratias agere gestiunt (Cic. Marcel. iii.); and see other illustrations in Wetst. Nothing is gained by making οἱ λίθοι figurative “men of stony hearts” such an event “might rouse even the dullest to rejoice” (Neander). comp. 3:8.

ἐὰν … σιωπήσουσιν. This is the abundantly attested reading (א A B L R Δ). With the exceptional constr. comp, ἐὰν μή τις ὁδηγήσει (Acts 8:31); ειὰν ὑμεῖς στήκετε (1 Thessalonians 3:8); ἐὰν οἴδαμεν (1 John 5:15); ἐὰν προσφέρεν? (Leviticus 1:14). In John 8:36 and Romans 14:8 the indic. is probably a false reading. Win. xli. 2 (b), p. 369; Lft. Epp. p. 46; Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 110; Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 29.

There is no authority for inserting mox (Beza), “shortely” (Genev.), or “immediately” (AV.) with “cry out.”

The reading κεκράξονται (AR.) is a substitution of the form which is most common in LXX (Ps. 64:14; Job 35:9; Jeremiah 11:11, Jeremiah 11:12, Jeremiah 47:2, etc.). See Veitch, s.v. “The simple fut. perf. does not occur in N.T.” Burton., § 93.

41-44. § The Predictive Lamentation of Jesus over Jerusalem. The spot where these words must have been uttered can be ascertained with certainty, although tradition, as in other cases (see on 4:29), has fixed on an impossible site. See the famous description by Stanley, Sin. & Pal. pp. 190-193, together with that of Tristram (Land of Israel, p. 174), part of which is quoted in the Eng. tr. of Caspari’s Chron. Einl. p. 188. See also Tristram, Bible Places, p. 125. This lamentation must not be confounded with the one recorded 13:34, 35; Matthew 23:37.

41. ἔκλαυσεν. Stronger than ἐδάκρυσεν (John 11:35): it implies wailing and sobbing. It is used of the widow at Nain (7:13), the penitent in the Pharisee’s house (7:38), and the mourners in the house of Jairus (8:52). It was the sight of the city and the thought of what might have been, which called forth the mentation. The attitude of the Pharisees had just shown Him what the real condition of the city was. Christianity is sometimes accused of being opposed to the spirit of patriotism: but there is deep patriotism in this lamentation.

With ειπʼ αὐτήν comp. 23:28; Revelation 1:7, Revelation 18:9. In class. Grk. we have ἐπʼ αὐτῇ, but more often αὐτήν without a prep. Here TR. with A etc. has ἐπʼ αὐτῇ.

42. Εἰ ἔγνωσἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ τὰ σὺ πρὸς εἰρήνην—This is probably correct; but the text is somewhat uncertain. The aposiopesis is impressive. In the expression of strong emotion sentences are often broken. 22:42; John 6:62, John 6:12:27; Exodus 32:32. Win. lxiv. 2, p. 749. The words imply that there have been various opportunities, of which this is the last. Thus once more (ποσάκις, 13:34) the synoptic narrative is found to imply the Judæan ministry recorded by Jn. The καὶ σύ perhaps implies no comparison: “even thou” (AV. RV.). But if “thou also” (Rhem.) be preferred, it probably means, “as well as My disciples.” For the wish comp. Deuteronomy 32:29. The protasis, “If thou hadst known,” does not imply any such definite apodosis as, “Thou wouldest weep as I do, for thy past blindness”; or, “Thou wouldest not perish”; or, “Thou wouldest hear Me and believe”; or, “I would rejoice like My disciples”; all of which have been suggested (Corn. à Lap. ad loc.). The expression is virtually a wish, “O that thou hadst known.” Comp. εἰ εἶχον μάχαιραν ἐν τῇ χειρί μου (Numbers 22:29); εἰ κατεμείναμεν καὶ κατῳκίσθμηεν παρὰ τὸν Ἰορδάνην (Joshua 7:7); εἰ ἤκουσας τῶν ἐντολῶν μου (Isaiah 48:18). In all these places Vulg. has utinam, and RV. either “would that” or “O that.” For τὰ πρὸς εἰρήνην see on 14:32. There is possibly an allusion to the name Jerusalem, which perhaps means “inheritance of peace.”

The καὶ γε before ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ (TR. with A R) can hardly be genuine; om. א B D L, Boh. Aeth, Goth. Iren-lat. Orig. The σου after ἡμέρᾳ is still more certainly an insertion; om. א A B D L, Boh. Aeth. Arm. Iren-lat. Orig. Eus. Bas. The σου after εἰρήνην has the support of Versions, but is just the kind of addition which is common in Versions; om. א B L, Iren-lat. Orig. Epiph. Godet naively remarks, Les deux mots καίγε et σου ont une grande valeur; which explains the insertion. Elsewhere in N.T. καί γε occurs only Acts 2:18 in a quotation.

νῦν δέ. “But now, as things are.” The actual fact is the reverse of the possibility just intimated. Comp. John 8:40, John 8:9:41; 1 Corinthians 7:14, 1 Corinthians 12:20.

ἐκρύβη. “Hidden once for A by Divine decree”: comp. John 12:38-40. The nom. to ἐκρύβη is not “the fact that (ότι) days will come,” etc. (Theoph.), but τὰ πρὸς εἰρήνην. For the form ἐκρύβη see Veitch, s.v.

43. ὅτι ἥξουσιν ἡμέραι. “Because days will come”; not “the days” (AV. RV.): see on 5:35 and 17:22. Dies multi, quia unum diem non observas (Beng.). The ὅτι probably depends upon εἰ επγνως “Would that thou hadst known in time; because the consequences (now inevitable) of not knowing are terrible.” Or ὅτι may introduce the explanation of νῦν δὲ ἐκρύβη: “They are bid from thine eyes, because the very reverse of peace will certainly come upon thee.” But in any case ὅτι is “because, for,” not “that.” For the constr. see Bless, Gr. p. 256.

It is not easy to decide between παρεμβαλοῦσιν (א C* L), which Tisch. and WH. prefer, and περιβαλοῦσιν (TR. with A B etc.). D has καὶ βαλοῦσιν ἐπὶ σέ. In LXX παρεμβάλλειν is freq. for “to encamp”: Numbers 1:50, Numbers 1:2:17, Numbers 1:27, Numbers 1:3:38, Numbers 1:33:10, Numbers 1:11, Numbers 1:12, Numbers 1:13, etc. Here it would mean “cast up in front” or “plant in beside,” rather than “surround.” In Vulg., through carelessness on Jerome’s part, circumdabunt is used to translate both περιβαλοῦσιν and περικυκλώσουσιν, although earlier Lat. texts distinguish. Similarly we have pressura for both�

Χάρακα. From meaning a single stake (vallus), χάραξ comes mean, not only a “palisade” (vallum) but a “rampart” or “palisaded mound” (vallum and agger combined). This is its meaning here: comp. Isaiah 37:33; Ezekiel 4:2, 26:8; Jos. Vita, xliii. In Ezekiel 4:2 we have περιβαλεῖς ἐπʼ αὐτὴν χάρακα “Pale” (Wic.), “rampars” (Gen.), and “bank” (Tyn. Cov. RV.) are all preferable to “trench” (Rhem. AV.). It is said that these details show that the prophecy has been re-worded to fit the event more precisely and that therefore this Gospel was written after a.d. 70. The argument is precarious, although the conclusion is probable. At any rate it is worthy of note that neither here nor elsewhere does Lk. call attention to the fulfilment of the prophecy, as he does in the case of Agabus (Acts 11:28). To those who assume that Jesus was unable to foresee the siege of Jerusalem, the amount of detail in the prediction is not of much moment. But it is not logical to maintain that Jesus could foresee the siege, but could not have foreseen these details; or to maintain that He would make known the coming siege, but would not make known the details. What is there in these details which is not common to all sieges? Given the siege, any one might add them. Il n’est pas nécessaire pour cela d’etre prophète (Godet). Moreover it is possible that Jesus is freely reproducing Isaiah 29:3: καὶ κυκλώσω ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ βαλῶ ἐπὶ σὲ χάρακα, καὶ θήσω περὶ σὲ πύργους. In both cases note the solemn effect of the simple coordination of sentences with καί: here we have καί five times. Note also the impressive repetition of the pronoun: we have σου, σοι, or σε ten times in two verses. For the fulfilment of this prophecy see Jos. B. J. v. 6. 2, 12. 2. The Jews burnt the palisade, and then Titus replaced it with a wall. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 30.

συνέξουσίν σε πάντοθεν. One of Lk.’s favourite verbs: 4:38, 8:37, 45, 12:50, 22:63; Acts 7:57, Acts 18:5, Acts 28:8. It is possibly medical (Hobart, p. 3). The adv. occurs elsewhere in N.T. in Mark 1:45 and Hebrews 9:4 only: it is rare in LXX. This “keeping in on every side” was so severe that thousands died of famine (Jos. B. J. v. 12. 3, vi. 1. 1).

44. ἐδαφιοῦσίν σε καὶ τὰ τέκνα σου ἐν σοί. Not a case of zeugma, for ἐδαφίζειν may mean “dash to the ground” (RV.) quite as well as “lay even with the ground” (A.V.), and the former will apply to both buildings and human beings. Comp. ἐδαφιεῖ τὰ νήπιά σου πρὸς τὴν πέτραν (Psalms 137:9); καὶ τὰ ὑποτίτθια αὐτῶν ἐδαφισθήσουνται (Hosea 14:1). In Amos 9:14 ἠδαγισμένας is a false reading for ἠφανισμένας, and therefore the passage gives no support to the rendering, “raze, level to the ground.” Field, Otium Norvic. iii. p. 53. Add in confirmation, τὰ νήπια αὐτῆς ἐδαφιοῦσιν (Nahum 3:10). The AV. translation, “lay thee even with the ground,” makes this tautological with “not leave in thee one stone upon another.” The τέκνα are all the inhabitants, not the young only.

The Latin Versions are interesting: ad treram prosternent (f Vulg.); ad terram consternent (some MSS. of Vulg.); ad terram sternent (E); ad solum deponent (e); ad nihilum deducent (d); pavimentabunt (a). In class. Lat. pavimentare means “to cover with a pavement” (Cic. Q. Fr. iii. 1. 1). Comp. the double meaning of “to floor”.

οὐκ�2 Samuel 17:13); κατασπάσω εἰς χάος τοὺς λίθους αὐτῆς (Micah 1:6). For�

οὐκ ἔγνως τὸν καιρὸν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς σου. “Thou didst not recognize the time in which God visited thee”—ἐπεσκέψατό σε. The whole of this period of opportunity, which culminated ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ, was unnoted and unused. Like ἐπισκέπτομαι (see on 1:68), ἐπισκοπή is a neutral term, and may imply either blessing or punishment. Here and 1 Peter 2:12 (not 5:6) in the former sense, as in Genesis 50:24; Job 29:4; Ecclus. 18:20; and perhaps Wisd. 3:7. In the sense of visiting with punishment it does not occur in N.T., but in LXX of Jeremiah 10:15; Isaiah 10:3, Isaiah 10:29:6; Wisd. 14:11, 19:15. It is not found in class. Grk. For τὸν καιρόν Syr-Sin. has “the day.”

Here Lk. rather abruptly ends his account of the triumphal procession. The actual entry into the city is not recorded by him. The proposal of schleiermacher and others to distinguish two triumphal entries, one unexpected and unannounced, recorded by the three, and one expected and arranged, recorded by S. John, is no real help. Does the hypothesis make either record more intelligible? What good purpose would a second triumphal procession serve? Would the Romans have allowed this popular Teacher to enter the city a second time with a tumultuous crowd hailing Him as King?

45, 46. The Second Cleansing of the Temple. Matthew 21:12, Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:15-17. Both Mt. and Mk. record the entry into Jerusalem. The latter tells us how He entered the city and the temple, and having “looked round about upon all things,” went back in the evening to Bethany with the Twelve (ver. 11.) It was the day following that He returned to Jerusalem and cleansed the temple, the cursing of the barren fig-tree taking place on the way. Lk. omits the latter, and records the former very briefly. He groups the cleansing and the subsequent teaching in the temple with the triumphal procession as a series of Messianic acts. They we all put of the last great scene in which Jesus publicly assumed the position of the Christ.

That this is a second cleansing, and not identical with John 2:14-22, may be regarded as reasonably certain. What is gained by the identification, which involves a gross chronological blunder on the part of either Jn., who places it at the beginning of Christ’s ministry, or of the others, who place it at the very end? Could any o those who were present, John or Peter, transfer so remarkable an event from one end of their experiences to the other? Such confusion in memory is not probable, especially when we consider the immense changes which distinguish the last Passover in the ministry from the first. That the three should omit the first cleansing is only natural, for they omit the whole of the early Judæan ministry. Jn. omits the second, as he omits the institution of the Eucharist and many other things, because it has been recorded already, and is not necessary for the plan of his Gospel. On the other hand, there is no difficulty in the supposition that the temple was twice cleansed by Jesus. He was not so reverenced in Jerusalem that one such act would put an end to the scandal for ever. The hierarchy would be glad of this opportunity for publicly treating His authority with contempt; and this would pportu more easy, as Jesus does not seem to have kept the next Passover at Jerusalem (John 6:4). If a year or two later He found that the evil had returned, and perhaps increased, would He not be likely to act as He did before? There are differences in the details as given by Jn. and by the others, which confirm the view that he and they are recording different events. D.C.G. ii. p. 712.

45. εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὸ ἱερόν. If we had no other account, we should suppose that this took place on the same day as the triumphal entry. But as Lk. gives no note of time, there is no discrepancy between him and Mk. The Court of the Gentiles is meant. The traffic would be great as the Passover drew now; and, as the hierarchy profited by it, we may be sure that they would try to make the attempt to stop it fail.

ἤρξατο ἐκβάλλειν. So also in Mk., whose account is specially graphic, as that of an eye-witness. In this respect the narrative in John 2:14 ff. is similar. Here perhaps ἤρξατο ἐκβ. is merely the Hebraistic paraphrase for ἐξέβαλεν (Matthew 21:12) or ἐξέβαλλεν. See on 3:8 and 12:45, and comp. LXX of Genesis 2:3; Deuteronomy 1:5; Judges 1:27, Judges 1:35; Jdg_1 Esdr. 4:1, 13, 33. Lk. omits the buyers, the money-changers, and the dove-sellers (Mt. Mk.); also His allowing no vessel to be carried through the temple (Mk.).

46. Here the three narratives are almost verbatim the same, and very different from John 2:15, John 2:16. On the first occasion, He charged them not to make His Father’s house a house of traffic (οἶκον ἐμπορίου): now He charges them with having made it a robbers’ den (σπήλλαιον λῃστῶν). The scandal is worse than before. For a detailed description see Edersh. L. & T. 1. pp. 364-374; also a remarkable passage in Renan, V. de J. p. 215, in which he points out how “antichristian” the traditions of the temple have always been. In the passage from Isaiah 56:7 Lk. substitutes ἔσται for κληθήσεται, and with Mt. omits πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, which one would have expected Lk. to preserve. Would he have omitted this, if he had had Mk., who preserves it, before him? See on 20:17. Comp. μὴ σπήλαιον λῃστῶν ὁ οἶκός μου οὖ ἐπικέκληται τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἐκεῖ ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν; (Jeremiah 7:11).

That καὶ ἔσται before ὁ οἶκος, and not ἐστιν after προσευχῆς is the right reading is sufficiently attested by א B L R, Arm., orig. But it is very unnatural to take καὶ ἔσται with γέγραπται: “It stands written and shall so.

47, 48. The Publicity and Popularity of Christ’s Final Teaching Mark 11:19. These two verses form a link between the sections before and after them, introducing the public work which followed the public entry. Comp. the similar notice with which the record of this brief period of public work closes, 21:37, 38.

47. ἧν διδάσκων. Periphrastic imperfect expressing continued action: 4:31, 5:17, 13:10. For τὸ καθʼ ἡμέραν comp. 11:3. Mt. says that He healed the blind and the lame who came to Him in e temple.

οἱ�Acts 13:50, Acts 13:25:2, Acts 13:28:7, Acts 13:17; Mark 6:21.

Jésus restait ainsi à Jérusalem un provincial admiré des provinciaux comme lui, mais repoussé par toute l’aristocratie de la nation. … Sa voix cut à Jérusalem peu d’éclat. Las préjugés de rare et secta, les ennemis directs de l’esprit de l’évangile, y étaient trop enracinés (Renan, V. de J. p. 344).

48. τὸ τί ποιήσωσιν. For this use of τό see on 1:62, and comp. 6:11.

ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἅπας. Not ὄχλος, not the mere crowd, but the whole nation, which was numerously represented. A mixed multitude of Jews from all puts of the world was gathering there for the Passover. These would sympathize with His cleansing of the temple; and His miracles of healing would add to the attractiveness of His teaching. This representative multitude “hung on His lips, listening.” Comp. pendet narrantis ab ore (Aen. iv. 79); narrantis conjux pendet ab ore viri (Ov. Her. i. 30). Other examples in Wetst. and McClellan. See on 11:29.

The form ἐξεκρέμετο (א B, Orig.) is preferred by Tisch. and WH. It implies a pres. κρέμομαι. But ἐξεκρέματο, if genuine, is imperf. also. Veitch, s. κρέμαμαι.

§ Found in Luke alone.

Clem. Alex. Clement of Alexandria.

B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæc. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86).

K K. Cod. Cyprius, sæc. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel.

U U. Cod. Nanianus, sæc. x. In the Library of St. Mark’s, Venice. Contains the whole Gospel.

Vulg. Vulgate.

om. omit.

D D. Cod. Bezae, sæc. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel.

A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæc. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete.

R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæc. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21.

אԠא Cod. Sinaiticus, sæc. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete.

L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæc. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel.

Boh. Bohairic.

Goth. Gothic.

TR. Textus Receptus.

Maldon. Maldonatus.

WH. Westcott and Hort.

Treg. Tregelles.

Tisch. Tischendorf.

RV. Revised Version.

Iren. Irenæus.

Ambr. Ambrose.

Chrys. Chrysostom.

Euthym. Euthymius Zigabenus.

Theoph. Theophylact.

Aug. Augustine.

Grot. Grotius.

Nösg. Nösgen.

Cypr. Cyprian.

1 In the Roman church this verse is Part of the gospel in the service for the dedication of churches.

L. J. Leben Jesu

Jos. Josephus.

Mey. Meyer.

AV. Authorized Version.

Wic. Wiclif.

Rhem. Rheims (or Douay).

Cov. Coverdale.

Tyn. Tyndale.

Arm. Armenian.

Aeth. Ethiopic.

Latt. Latin.

Orig. Origen.

Syrr. Syriac.

Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses.


C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, sæc. 5. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel: 1:2-2:5, 2:42-3:21, 4:25-6:4, 6:37-7:16, or 17, 8:28-12:3, 19:42-20:27, 21:21-22:19, 23:25-24:7, 24:46-53.

These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX and N.T.

Beng. Bengel.

Trench, Trench, New Testament Synonyms.

Luth. Luther.

Wsctt. Westcott.

Cur. Curetonian.

Sin. Sinaitic.

M M. Cod. Campianus, sæc. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel.

Aegyptt. Egyptian.

D. B. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition.

1 Mk. says ἐπʼ αὐτόν (τὸν πῶλον), Jn. ἐπʼ αὐτό (ὀνάριον). Mt. alone mentions both the colt and its mother and continues the plural throughout; ἐπέθηκαν ἐπʼ αὐτῶν τὰ ἱμάτια, καὶ ἐπεκάθισεν ἐπάνω αὐτῶν: over which Strauss is sarcastically critical.

Wetst. Wetstein.

Tert. Tertullian.

Edersh. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.

Δ̠Δ. Cod. Sangallensis, sæc. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel.

Win. Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek (the page refers to Moulton’s edition).

Lft. J. B. Lightfoot,* Notes on Epistles of S. Paul.

Iren-lat. Latin Version of Irenæus

Eus. Eusebius of Cæsarea

Bas. Basil.

Epiph. Epipnamus.

Gen. Geneva.

V. de J. Vie de Jésus.

Bibliographical Information
Driver, S.A., Plummer, A.A., Briggs, C.A. "Commentary on Luke 19". International Critical Commentary NT. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/icc/luke-19.html. 1896-1924.
adsFree icon
Ads FreeProfile