Heinrich Meyer Commentary - Luke 13

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Heinrich Meyer Commentary - Luke 13


Verse Commentaries:



Chapter Level Commentary:
CHAPTER 13

Luk_13:3; Luk_13:5. The evidence in the two verses is so divided between μετανοῆτε (Elz.) and μετανοήσητε (Lach.), as also between ὡσαύτως and ὁμοίως (Lachm. has in both places ὁμοίως , which Elz. reads only in Luk_13:5), that it affords us no means of decision. Tisch. reads in Luk_13:3, μετανοῆτε … ὁμοίως , but in Luk_13:5, μετανοήσητε … ὡσαύτως . It is certain that the one passage was changed in accordance with the other,—most probably Luk_13:5 in accordance with Luk_13:3, and that consequently both passages are not, as by Lachm., to be read alike, because in that case no reason would have been suggested for the variation.

Luk_13:4. Instead of οὗτοι Lachm. and Tisch. have, on preponderating evidence, αὐτοί . The Recepta is a frequent alteration.

Luk_13:6. The arrangement πεφυτευμ . ἐν τ . ἀμπ . αὐτ . (Lachm. Tisch.) is preponderatingly attested, and still more strongly is ζητῶν καρπ . (Elz. has καρπ . ζ .).

Luk_13:7. After ἔτη Tisch. has ἀφʼ οὗ , following B D L T5 à , al. Rightly; it was passed over because it could be dispensed with.

Luk_13:8. Elz. has κοπρίαν . But decisive authorities have κόπρια . The feminine form was more common from its use in the LXX.

Luk_13:11. ἦν ] is wanting after γυνή in B L T5 X à , min. vss. Lachm. Tisch. A frequent addition.

Luk_13:12. τῆς ] Lachm. has ἀπὸ τῆς , in accordance with A D X Π à , min. An exegetical expansion.

Luk_13:14. ταύταις ] A B L, etc. have αὐταῖς . So too Lachm. and Tisch. Rightly; ταύταις occurred readily to the transcribers; comp. on Luk_13:4.

Luk_13:15. Instead of ὑποκριτά (Elz.), ὑποκριταί is rightly approved by Griesb., and adopted by Lachm. and Tisch., in accordance with considerably preponderating evidence. The singular was introduced in accordance with the foregoing αὐτῷ . In the previous clause instead of οὖν read δέ , with Lachm. and Tisch., in accordance with B D L à , min. Syr. Copt. Sahid. Vulg. It This δέ easily dropped out after the last syllable of ἀπεκρίθη (thus still in one cod. of It.), and the connection that was thus broken was wrongly restored in some authorities by οὖν , in others by καί (16, Aeth.).

On the other hand, in Luk_13:18, instead of δέ we are to adopt οὖν with Tisch., following B L à , min. Vulg. It. al., the reference of which was not understood.

Luk_13:19. μέγα ] is wanting in B D L T5 à , 251, vss. Ambr. Suspected by Griesb., bracketed by Lachm. [omitted by Tisch. 8]. Omitted in accordance with Mat_13:32.

Luk_13:24. πύλης ] Griesb. Lachm. Tisch. have θύρας . The Recepta is from Mat_7:13.

Luk_13:25. We are here to read κύριε only once, with Tisch., following B L à , 157, Copt. Sahid. Vulg. It. Sax. The repetition is from Mat_25:11.

Luk_13:31. ἡμέρᾳ ] Tisch. has ὥρᾳ , which is so weightily attested by A B* D L R X à , min., and is so frequent in Luke, that ἡμέρᾳ appears as having come in by means of the subsequent numeration of days.

Luk_13:32. ἐπιτελῶ ] Lachm. and Tisch. have ἀποτελῶ , in accordance with B L à , 33, 124, to which also D is associated by ἀποτελοῦμαι ,—it was displaced by the more familiar word ἐπιτελ .

Luk_13:35. After ὑμῶν Elz. has ἔρημος , in opposition to preponderating evidence. An exegetical addition in this place and at Mat_23:38.

ἕως ἄν ] this ἄν is wanting in B D K L R, min., in accordance with Mat_23:39.

ἥξει ] Lachm. and Tisch. have ἥξει , in accordance with A D V Δ Λ , min. The weight of these authorities is all the more considerable in this place that B L M R X à have not ἥξῃ ὅτε at all, which omission occurred in accordance with Matthew.