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, καὶ ἰδού, Μωύσης καὶ Ἠλείας, 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 Mt 2 = Lk 29, in Lk 31. 32, in Mt 6-7, and in Lk 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 (dioTeiλaro) them that they should recount to no man what they saw, except when the Son of Man should rise from the dead.” See note on Lk 936.

M

M

ἐγερθῇ for ἀναστῇ; cf. on 1621.

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 Mk 652 817, and see Introduction, pp. xxxiii f.

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, Jud. 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?—Tepúτnσav] aor. for Mk.'s imperf., as often. Tí for Mk.'s ambiguous or; cf. similar changes in 1719 Mk 928, Mt 911 = Mk 216.

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."-ȧTOKATAσTýσei] for Μκ.'s ἀποκατιστάνει is an assimilation to the LXX of Mal 45. 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 192.10 "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 καθώς γέγραπται ἐπ ̓ autóv? 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 Mk 12b, and the equally obscure καθώς γέγραπται ἐπ ̓ 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: οὐκ ἐπέγνωσαν αὐτὸν ἀλλά, 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: ovтws kai ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου μέλλει πάσχειν ὑπ ̓ αὐτῶν.

12. And I say to you, That Elijah has already come, and they M did not recognise him, but did in his case whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is about to suffer from them.]—ok étéyvwσav autóv] i.e. did not recognise Elijah in the person of the Baptist.ἠθέλησαν] aor. for imperf., as often.—ἐποίησαν—ὅσα ἠθέλησαν] Cf. Dn 1116 ποιήσει—κατὰ τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ.—μέλλει] see on 167.

13. Then understood the disciples that He spake to them concern- E ing John the Baptist.] An editorial comment in favour of the disciples; cf. 1612.

14. And when they came to the multitude.] Mk. has: "And M 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

M

M

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 (kaußeiv 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.

:

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.—kúpte] for Mk.'s didáσkaλe. A similar change in 825-σeλnviášerai] only again in 424.

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 (oxvσav).-poσýveуka] See on 43.-Оeрaπevσai] 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 & 'Inooûs.-elmev] for Mk.'s λέγει, as often.—καὶ διεστραμμένη] is not in Mk. ; cf. Dt 325.-μεθ' ur] "in your company. Mk. has πpòs iμâs; cf. Mk 63.—wde] is not in Mk.; cf. Mt 1418. 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, Mk 123-28, 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, Mk 822-26 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 årò Tŷs wpas ékeivηs, cf. 818 922 1528.

19. Then came the disciples to Jesus privately, and said, Why M could not we cast him out?] Mk. has: "And when He entered into a house, His disciples privately were asking Him, Why (őtɩ) could not we cast him out?" For Mt.'s omission of the house, see on 1515. Sià tí for Mk.'s oтɩ; cf. Tí, 1710, for ort, and 911 διὰ τί, for ὅτι.

20. And He saith to them, Because of your little faith: for M 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 oyómoros in 680 826 1481 168. To emphasise the effect of faith, he adds a saying, influenced, perhaps, by opos, 171.9, which recurs in a different form in 2121, where it is taken from Mk. Lk 176 has a similar but quite independent saying.ὀλιγοπιστίαν] πίστις here is different from the trust implied in 810 92. 22. 29 158 630 826 1431 168. 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. 2121 and 1 Co 132. 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 Mt 2121.

14-20. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. (a) in two or three small points, e.g. λéywv, Mt 15, Lk 38; ötɩ, ib. ; ýdvvý@noav, Mt 16, Lk 40; einev, Mt 17, Lk 41; kai dieσтpaμμévn, ib.; de, Mt 17, Lk 41; (b) in omitting the greater part of Mk 20-26, of which, however, Mt. shows a trace in v.15 woλλákis yáp, K.T.λ. = Mk 22, and Lk. shows traces in v.38 ἐξέφνης κράζει καὶ σπαράσσει αὐτὸν μετ ̓ ἀφροῦ καὶ μόλις ἀποχωρεῖ ἀπ' αὐτοῦ συντρίβον αὐτόν. Cf. Mk 20. 20. 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 Mk 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." Lk 485 omits the loud cry, and adds a

M

M

M

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. ὀλιγοπιστίαν] NB1 13 22 33 124 346 S. ἀπιστίαν, CD al Sl latt. ὀλιγοπιστία occurs only here, but ὀλιγόπιστος occurs 4 times in Mt Internal evidence is in favour of ¿λıyorɩorla—(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 ὀλιγόπιστος 4 times of the Apostles would suggest diyorioría as a suitable word here; (2) the substitution in the MSS. of the common diaria for the rare Ayomoria is easier than the reverse process.

21. τοῦτο δὲ τὸ γένος οὐκ ἐκπορεύεται εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ νηστεία] So CD al latt. Omit * B 33 eff1 S1 S2. The words are interpolated here from Mk 9, which had already been corrupted by the addition of cal νηστεία.

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 καὶ οὐκ ἤθελεν ἵνα τις γνοῖ. Cf. his omission of οὐδένα ἤθελεν γνῶναι from Mk 724, ñ0eλev wapeλbeîv avroús from Mk 648. But it is difficult to see why he substitutes συστρεφομένων δὲ αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ for Mk.'s ἐπορεύοντο διὰ τῆς Γαλιλαίας. συστρέφεσθαι

occurs only once again in the N.T., in Ac 283, 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."-uéλe] See on 1627.

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 1621. 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.—λvπéîola] occurs six times in Mt., twice in Mk.opódpa] seven times in 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 Lk 945.

22, 23. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: