Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Mark 14:32 - 14:42
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mar_14:32-42. Comp. on Mat_26:36-46. Comp. Luk_22:40-46.
Mar_14:33. ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι ] used in this place of the anguish (otherwise at Mar_9:15). The word occurs in the N. T. only in Mark, who uses strongly graphic language. Comp. Mar_16:5-6. Matthew, with more psychological suitableness, has λυπεῖσθαι .
ἕως θανάτου ] See on Mat_26:38, and comp. Sir_37:2; Clem. 1 Corinthians 4 : ζῆλος ἐποίησεν Ἰωσὴφ μέχρι θανάτου διωχθῆναι , Test. XII. Patr. p. 520.
παρέλθῃ ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ ] Comp. Test. XII. Patr. p. 527: ηὔξατο … ἵνα παρέλθῃ ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ ἡ ὀργὴ κυρίου .
ἡ ὥρα ] the hour κατʼ ἐξοχήν , hora fatalis. It passes over from the man, when the latter is spared from undergoing its destiny.
Mar_14:36. Ἀββᾶ ] àÅáÌÈà ; so spoke Jesus in prayer to His Father. This mode of address assumed among the Greek-speaking Christians the nature of a proper name, and the fervour of the feeling of childship added, moreover, the appellative address ὁ πατήρ ,—a juxtaposition, which gradually became so hallowed by usage that here Mark even places it in the very mouth of Jesus, which is an involuntary Hysteron proteron. The usual view, that ὁ πατήρ is an addition by way of interpreting, is quite out of place in the fervent address of prayer. See on Rom_8:15. Against the objections of Fritzsche, see on Gal_4:6.
παρένεγκε ] carry away past. Hahn was wrong, Theol. d. N. T. I. p. 209 f, in deducing from the passage (and from Luk_22:24) that Jesus had been tempted by His σάρξ . Every temptation came to Him from without. But in this place He gives utterance only to His purely human feeling, and that with unconditional subordination to God, whereby there is exhibited even in that very feeling His μὴ γνῶναι ἁμαρτίαν , which is incompatible with incitements to sin from His own σάρξ .
ἀλλʼ οὐ ] The following interrogative τί shows how the utterance emotionally broken off is here to be completed. Hence somewhat in this way: but there comes not into question, not: ἀλλʼ οὐ γενέσθω .
Mar_14:41. καθεύδετε λοιπὸν κ . τ . λ .] as at Mat_26:45, painful irony: sleep on now, and take your rest! Hardly has Jesus thus spoken when He sees Judas approach with his band (Mar_14:42-43). Then His mood of painful irony breaks off, and with urgent earnestness He now goes on in hasty, unconnected exclamations: there is enough (of sleep)! the hour is come! see, the Son of man is delivered into the hands of sinners! arise, let us go (to meet this decisive crisis)! see, my betrayer is at hand! It is only this view of ἀπέχει , according to which it refers to the sleep of the disciples, that corresponds to the immediate connection with what goes before ( καθεύδετε κ . τ . λ .) and follows; and how natural is the change of mood, occasioned by the approaching betrayers! All the more original is the representation. Comp. Erasmus, Bengel (“suas jam peractas habet sopor vices; nunc alia res est”), Kuinoel, Ewald, Bleek. Hence it is not: there is enough of watching (Hammond, Fritzsche). The usus loquendi of ἀπέχει , sufficit (Vulgate), depends on the passages, which certainly are only few and late, but certain, (pseudo-) Anacreon, xxviii. 33; Cyrill. in Hagg. ii. 9, even although the gloss of Hesychius: ἀπέχει , ἀπόχρη , ἐξαρκεῖ , is critically very uncertain.[166] Others interpret at variance with linguistic usage: abest, sc. anxictas mea (see Heumann, Thiess), or the betrayer (Bornemann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1843, p. 103 f.); ἀπέχειν , in fact, does not mean the being removed in itself, but denotes the distance (Xen. Anab. iv. 3. 5; Polyb. i. 19. 5; 2Ma_11:5; 2Ma_12:29). Lange also is linguistically wrong in rendering: “it is all over with it,” it will do no longer. The comparison of οὐδὲν ἀπέχει , nothing stands in the way,—in which, in fact, ἀπέχει , is not intransitive, but active,—is altogether irrelevant.
[166] See Buttmann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1858, p. 506. He would leave ἀπέχει without any idea to complete it, and that in the sense: it is accomplished, it is the time of fulfilment, the end is come, just as Grotius, ad Mat_26:45 (peractum est), and as the codex Brixiensis has, adest finis, while D and min. add to ἀπέχει : τὸ τέλος . The view deserves consideration. Still the usual it is enough is more in keeping with the empirical use, as it is preserved in the two passages of Anacreon and Cyril; moreover, it gives rise to a doubt in the matter, that Jesus should have spoken a word equivalent to the τετέλεσται of Joh_19:30 even now, when the consummation was only just beginning.