Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Luke 14
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
θεραπεύειν ] B D L à , min. have θεραπεῦσαι , to which these authorities and vss. add ἢ οὔ . This θεραπεῦσαι ἢ οὔ is, with Lachm. (who, however, brackets ἢ οὔ ) and Tisch., to be adopted. The Recepta is from Mat_12:10.
Luk_14:5. Instead of ὄνος in Elz., υἱός is to be read, on preponderating evidence. Recommended by Griesb., adopted by Matth. Scholz, Lachm. Tisch.; comp. also Rinck. The heterogeneous collocation υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς excited objection, so that υἱός was displaced in some authorities by ὄνος (following Luk_13:15), in others by πρόβατον (D, Cant., following Mat_12:11).
Luk_14:10. Elz. has ἀνάπεσον , which on decisive evidence is to be rejected. The most important MSS. are divided between ἀνάπεσε (Matth. Scholz, Rinck, Lachm. Tisch.) and ἀνάπεσαι (Griesb. Schulz, Fritzsche, ad Marc. p. 640). Although the attestation of ἀνάπεσε (A B* E H K S U V Γ à , min.) is still stronger than that of ἀνάπεσαι , yet the latter is to be preferred. The less familiar form gave place to one that was better known. To regard ἀνάπεσαι as a clerical error (so Tisch. and Winer, p. 69 [E. T. 87]) is the more precarious, as the same clerical error must be assumed also at Luk_17:7.
Luk_14:16. μέγα ] B** D Λ , min. Clem, have μέγαν . So Lachm. Rightly; μέγα is an amendment [Tisch. 8 has μέγα ].
Luk_14:18. The order πάντες παραιτ . is, with Lachm. and Tisch., to be preferred on decisive evidence.
Luk_14:21. After δοῦλος Elz. has ἐχεῖνος , which is condemned by Griesb., and on decisive evidence struck out by Lachm. and Tisch. An exegetical addition.
χωλοὺς κ . τυφλούς ] Lachm. and Tisch. have τυφλοὺς κ . χωλούς . Rightly; the evidence in favour thereof preponderates; the omission of καὶ χωλ . (A, min. Syr.jer.) occasioned the restoration in the order given at Luk_14:13.
Luk_14:27. τὸν σταυρ . ἑαυτοῦ is found in A B L** M Δ , min. Lachm. Tisch. The Recepta τ . στ . αὑτοῦ is from Mat_10:38.
Luk_14:28. Elz. has τὰ πρὸς ἀπαρτ ., in opposition to decisive evidence. With Griesb. Scholz, Tisch. merely εἰς ἀπαρτ . is to be read, in accordance with B D L R, min. τά was added as a completion (A E G H K M S U Γ Δ Λ à , min. Lachm. have τὰ εἰς ), and εἰς was explained by πρός . Comp. Luk_14:32.
Luk_14:31. The arrangement ἐτέρῳ βασιλ . συμβ . (Lachm. Tisch.) is decisively attested, as well as also ὑπαντῆσαι .
Luk_14:34. Instead of καλόν read, with Tisch., following B L X à , min. vss., καλὸν οὖν . Being apparently inappropriate, οὖν dropped out the more easily after the syllable ON.
ἐὰν δέ ] B D L X à , min. vss. Fathers have ἐὰν δὲ καί . So rightly, Lachm. and Tisch. καί was passed over in accordance with Mat_5:13; Mar_9:50.