Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - Matthew 15:1 - 15:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
(M) 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.”—ττ] see on 2:7.—ποέχνα] see on 4:3.
2. The editor here omits Mk.’s long archæ 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.”—πρβίοσ] for Mk.’s more technical ο πρπτῦι κτ.—ο γρνποτι κτλ Mk. has: ἀλ κιαςχρὶ ἐθοσντνἄτν Mt. avoids Mk.’s technical κιαςχρί.
(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 ἀεετ to πρβίεεto 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.”—θό] substituted for Μυῆ to heighten the antithesis.—τμ τνπτρ κὶτνμτρ] Mk. has συtwice. So LXX. in Deu_5:16. In Exo_20:12, only after πτρ.—ὁκκλγν κτλ from Exo_21:17 LXX. has ατῦtwice and τλυήε θντ , but A F Luc θντ τλυάω For ἤthe 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 Gift1) 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 Κρά, 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 ὠεηῇ some such words as “he is absolved from honouring his parents.” But we should expect “and” before οκτ. 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 οκτ ἀίτ ατν κτλ into the required clause giving the contents of λγτ. “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 ο μ, 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 ᾗπρδκτ, see on 8:16. For ἀυον which occurs here and in Gal_3:17, the lexx. cite Dion. H. 2. 72. Add Ditt. Syll. 329. 30.1
(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. (except ὁλὸ οτς = LXX. (for οτςὁλό), which differ only slightly from the LXX. of Isa_29:13. The LXX. has: ἐ τῖ χίει ατντμσνμ, and ἐτλααἀθώω κὶδδσαίς
2. τνπρδσν S1 S2 have “the commandments,” assimilating to v. 3 τνἐτλντῦθο.
5. πτρ ατῦ add ἢτνμτρ ατῦ C E al. om. אB D S1 S2.
6. τνλγν אc a B D a b ff1 2 S1 S2; τννμν א et c b C; τνἐτλν E F al.
8. The quotation is completed by the addition of the words ἐγζιμιat the beginning, and of τ σόαιατῦκίafter οτςby C E al.
(M) 10. And having called the multitude, He said to them, Hear and understand.]—ποκλσμνς Mk. adds πλν For Mt.’s omission, see Introduction, p. xx.—επν for Mk.’s ἔεε, as often.—ἀοεε Mk. has ἀοστ μυπνε.—τνὄλν 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 ἐ τῦσόαο for ἐ τῦἀθώο, 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.]
ττ] see on 2:7.—ποεθνε] see on 4:3.—ἐκναίθσν 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. πσ φτί, 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, B. Chag. 15a.—ὁηο εσντφο] Lk. has a parallel in the Sermon, 6:39 μτ δντιτφὸ τφὸ ὁηεν οχ ἀφτριεςβθννἐπσῦτι
(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. Mar_2:1, Mar_3:20, Mar_9:28, Mar_10:10 with the parallels in Mat_9:1, Mat_12:22, Mat_15:21, Mat_17:19, Mat_19:8. For the prominence given to S. Peter in this Gospel, cf. 10:2, 14:28ff., 16:16ff.—τνπρβλν That is the saying of v. 11, which Mt. has already interpreted by inserting ἐ τῦσόαο.
(M) 16. And He said, Are you even yet without understanding? Mk. has: “And, He saith to them, Are you also so without understanding?”—ὁδ] for Mk.’s κί as often.—επν for Mk.’s λγι as often.—ἀμν only here in N.T. Mk. has οτς
(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.—ἀερν is a rare word of doubtful meaning. It is generally understood as equivalent to ἀόαο. 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 ἐβλεα for ἐπρύτιand omits κθρζνπνατ βώαα 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 ἐ τῦσόαο for ἐ τῦἀθώο, and by inserting ἐ τςκρίςἐέχτι 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 (κκί 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.”1
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 = Mar_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 ἐεθνδ ἀατςin Mar_7:24 marks the beginning of a new period in that Gospel. Cf. ἐεθνἀατςat the beginning of the next development, Mar_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, Mar_9:30, Mar_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, Mar_8:31, 9:Mar_8:10-12, Mar_8:31-32. In Mt. the long and purposeless journeys are curtailed, cf. 15:29 with Mar_7:31, and it might seem as though the editor intended to enter upon a new section of his Gospel at 16:21 ἀὸττ, κτλ 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: Mat_4:12-20 = Mar_1:14-23, work in or near Capernaum; Mat_15:20-35=Mar_7:24-50, work outside Galilee marked by a new phase in Christ’s teaching; Mat_19:1-31=Mar_10, journey to Jerusalem; Mt 21-28=Mk 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.—ἐεθν for Mk.’s Semitic ἀατς—ἀεώηε] for Mk.’s ἀῆθν See on 2:12. ἐεθνin 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 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.]—ἠώω] ἐωά in the LXX and N.T. has the sense to “beg,” “beseech.” So in the Papyri, e.g. Fayû Towns, cxxxii. 1; cf. Ditt. Syll.. 328. 5, 930. 56.—εςτ πόαα κτλ see on 10:6.—ποεθνε] see on 4:3.—ποεύε] 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.—κνρα house-dogs. Mk. is fond of diminutives, which Mt. sometimes retains; but cf. v. 25 θγτιν for which Mt. θγτρ
(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.”—Νί “Yes, that is true.”—κὶγρ “It is neither good to give the children’s food to the dogs, nor is it necessary; for they eat of the crumbs.” ψχω] The word seems to occur here only.—κρε occurs here only in Mk., in Mat_19 times, inLk. 16, in Jn. 38.
(M) 28. Then Jesus answered and said to her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it to thee as thou wilt. And her daughter was healed from that hour.]—ττ] see on 2:7.—ἀὸτςὥα ἐενς cf. Mat_9:22, Mat_8:13, Mat_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 πσι = 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 Mar_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. ἀαωεν see on 2:12; κὶἰο, see on 1:20; Ἐέσνμ ΚρευὲΔυί, cf. 9:27 ἐέσνἡᾶ υὲΔυί, 17:15 Κρεἐέσνμυτνυό, 20:30 Κρεἐέσνἡᾶ υὲΔυί; ποέχσα, see on 4:3; ποκνῖ, see on 2:2; ττ, see on 2:7; μγλ συἡπσι γνθτ σιὡ θλι, cf. 8:13 ὡ ἐίτυα γνθήωσι 9:22 ἡπσι συσσκνσ, 9:29 κτ τνπσι ὑῶ γνθτ ὑῖ; κὶἰθ ἡθγτρατςἀὸτςὥα ἐενς cf. 9:22 κὶἐώηἄὸτςὥα ἐενς8:13 κὶἰθ—ἐ τ ὥᾳἐεν, 17:18 κὶἐεαεθ—ἀὸτςὥα ἐενς 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 Mar_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 δὰΣδνςcovers 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 μτβςἐεθνas a connecting formula, cf. 11:1 μτβ ἐεθν 12:9 μτβςἐεθν 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 ἀοαόεο ατνἀὸτῦὄλυκτ ἰίν 8:23 ἐιαόεο—ἐήεκνατνἔωτςκμς In both physical contact and material means are employed, 7:33 ἔαε τὺ δκύοςατῦεςτ ὦαατῦκὶπύο ἥαοτςγώσςατῦ 8:23 κὶπύα εςτ ὄμτ ατῦἐιεςτςχῖα ατ. In the former we read that Christ sighed (ἐτνξν 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, ε τ βέες 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 μννεπ λγ, 9:5, 8:16 ἐέαετ πεμτ λγ. Mt. elsewhere omits such phrases as ἐτνξν which seem to attribute emotion or effort to Christ; cf. the omission of σλγνσες(D ὀγσες Mar_1:43; ἐβιηάεο, 1:45; πρβεάεο ατῦ μτ ὀγςσνυομνς 3:5; ἐέτ, 3:21; ἐαμσν 6:6; ἀατνξςτ πεμτ, 8:12; ἠαάτσν 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 Mat_8:29, Mat_8:14:18, 16:Mat_8:9-10, Mat_8:17:11, Mat_8:14, Mat_8:17, Mat_8:18:1, Mat_8:19:7, Mat_8:26:18 and Introduction, p. xxxi. It seems probable, therefore, that the editor intentionally passes over Mar_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.]—ποῆθν see on 4:3.—πρ τὺ πδςατῦ D S1 have ὑό τὺ ὄλυ θυάα] so B E al S1 S2. אC D U Δcurss have τνὄλν 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.]—ὁδ Ἰσῦ] 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.—επν as usual for λγι—σλγίεθι See on 9:36.—ὅιἤηἡέα τεςπομνυίμι 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. Est_4:11 ο κκηα—εσνατιἡέα τικνα 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.—κὶἀοῦα] 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 ἐνἀούωinto ἀοῦα—ο θλ, 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 ὅι see Introduction, p. xx. ἐηί and νσι occur only here in the Gospels. Both are rare words in Biblical Greek. For χράεν see on 5:6. ἐ ἐηί is easier than Mk.’s ἐʼἐηίς
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 πργέλιand ἐὶτςγς For Mt.’s change of ἐὶτςγςinto ἐὶτνγν cf. 13:2; ἐὶτναγαό for Mk.’s ἐὶτςγς 14:25 πρπτνἐὶθλσα for Mk.’s ἐὶτςθλση; 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 (επν 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 πνε and πήες to assimilate to 14:20.—συία] For this spelling, see Deissm. Bib. Stud. 158, 185. D has σοία here and in Mar_8:20. In Mar_8:8 it is read by אA* D; in Mat_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 χρςγνιῶ κὶπιίν 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 κὶτὺ—ἰθα with 15:36.
19 ο δ μθτὶτῖ ὄλι with 15:36.
20 κὶἔαο πνε with 15:37.
20 κὶἦα τ πρσεο τνκαμτνδδκ κφνυ πήεςwith 15:37 κίτ πρσεο τνκαμτνἦα ἑτ συία πήες
21 ο δ ἐθοτςἦα ἄδε ὡε πναιχλο χρςγνιῶ κὶπιίνwith 15:38 ο δ ἐθοτςἦα τταιχλο ἄδε χρςγνιῶ κὶπιίν
39. Μγδν אB D; Magedon, S2; Magedan, S1; Magedan, latt; Μγαά E F al.
M the Second Gospel.
LXX. The Septuagint Version.
1 Cf. Josephus, Against Apion, 1: τνκλύεο ὅκνκρὰ— — δλἵδ—δρνθο.
Dion. H. Dionysius Halicarnassus.
Ditt. Dittenberger Sylloge.
1 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, Est_6:6 times in 4 Mac, and 6 times in Aquila.
S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS.
S Syriac version: Curetonian.
E editorial passages.
al i.e. with other uncial MSS.
B. Babylonian Talmud.
1 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 Mk 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.
O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f.
Deissm. Deissmann.