Heinrich Meyer Commentary - Mark 6:17 - 6:29

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Heinrich Meyer Commentary - Mark 6:17 - 6:29


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Mar_6:17-29. See on Mat_14:3-12. Mark narrates more circumstantially[98] and with more peculiar originality; see especially Mar_6:20, the contents of which, indeed, are held by Baur to rest on a deduction from Mat_14:9.

αὐτός ] is a commentary upon the ἘΓΏ of Mar_6:16. Herod himself, namely, etc.

ἐν φυλακῇ ] in a prison, without the article. At Mar_6:28, on the other hand, with the article. Comp. 1Ma_9:53; Thuc. iii. 34; Plut. Mor. p. 162 B; Plat. Leg. ix. 864 E: ἐν δημοσίῳ δεσμῷ δεθείς .

Mar_6:19-20. The ΘΈΛΕΙΝ ΑὐΤῸΝ ἈΠΟΚΤΕῖΝΑΙ is here, in variation from Matthew, denied in the case of Herod. It is not merely an apparent variation (Ebrard, p. 384; Lange), but a real one, wherein Mark’s narrative betrays a later shape of the tradition (in opposition to Schneckenburger, erst. kan. Ev. p. 86 f.); while with Matthew Josephus also, Antt. xviii. 5. 2, attributes to Herod the intention of putting to death. Comp. Strauss, I. p. 396 f. As to ἐνεῖχεν (she gave close heed to him), see on Luk_11:53.

ἐφοβεῖτο ] he feared him; he was afraid that this holy man, if he suffered him to be put to death, would bring misfortune upon him. From this fear arose also the utterance contained in Mar_6:14; Mar_6:16 : “Herodem non timuit Johannes,” Bengel.

συνετήρει ] not; magni eum faciebat (Erasmus, Grotius, Fritzsche, de Wette), which the word does not mean, but he guarded him (Mat_9:17; Luk_5:38; Tob_3:15; 2Ma_12:42; Polyb. iv. 60. 10; Herodian, ii. 1.11), i.e. he did not abandon him, but took care that no harm happened to him: “custodiebat eum,” Vulg. Comp. Jansen, Hammond, Bengel, who pertinently adds by way of explanation: “contra Herodiadem;” and also Bleek. According to Ewald, it is: “he gave heed to him.” Comp. Sir_4:20; Sir_27:12. But this thought is contained already in what precedes and in what follows. The compound strengthens the idea of the simple verb, designating its action as entire and undivided.

ἀκούσας ] when he had heard him. Observe afterwards the emphasis of ἩΔΈΩς (and gladly he heard him).

πολλὰ ἐποίει ] namely, which he had heard from John. Very characteristic is the reading: Π . ἨΠΌΡΕΙ , which has the strongest internal probability of being genuine, although only attested by B L à , Copt.[99]

We may add that all the imperfects apply to the time of the imprisonment, and are not to be taken as pluperfects (Grotius, Bolten). The ἤκουε took place when Herod was actually present (as was now the case; see on Mat_14:10 f.) in Machaerus; it is possible also that he had him sent for now and then to his seat at Tiberias. But in any case the expressions of Mark point to a longer period of imprisonment than Wieseler, p. 297, assumes.

Mar_6:21. ἩΜΈΡΑς ΕὔΚΑΙΡΟΥ ] ΕὐΚΑΊΡΟς , in reference to time, means nothing else than at the right time, hence: a rightly-timed, fitting, appropriate day (Beza, Grotius, Jansen, Fritzsche, de Wette, Ewald, Bleek, and many others). Comp. Heb_4:16; Psa_104:27; 2Ma_14:29; Soph. O. C. 32; Herodian, i. 4. 7, i. 9. 15, v. 8. 16; and see Plat. Def. p. 413 C. Mark makes use of this predicate, having before his mind the purpose of Herodias, Mar_6:19, which hitherto had not been able to find any fitting point of time for its execution on account of the tetrarch’s relation to John.[100] Grotius well says: “opportuna insidiatrici, quae vino, amore et adulatorum conspiratione facile sperabat impelli posse nutantem mariti animum.” Others (Hammond, “Wolf, Paulus, Kuinoel) have explained it contrary to linguistic usage as: dies festivus ( éåÉí èåÉá ). At the most, according to a later use of ΕὐΚΑΙΡΕῖΝ (Phrynich. p. 125; comp. below, Mar_6:31), ἩΜΈΡΑ ΕὔΚΑΙΡΟς might mean: a day, on which one has convenient time, i.e. a leisure day (comp. εὐκαίρως ἔχειν , to be at leisure, Polyb. v. 26. 10, al., ΕὐΚΑΙΡΊΑ , leisure), which, however, in the connection would be inappropriate, and very different from the idea of a dies festivus.

On μεγιστᾶνες , magnates, a word in current use from the Macedonian period, see Kypke, I. p. 167; Sturz, Dial. Mac. p. 182; Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 197.

ΚΑῚ ΤΟῖς ΠΡΏΤΟΙς Τῆς ΓΑΛ .] The first two were the chief men of the civil and military service of the tetrarch. Moreover, the principal men of Galilee, people who were not in his service (“status provinciales,” Bengel), were called in.

Mar_6:22. ΑὐΤῆς Τῆς ἩΡΩΔ .] of Herodias herself. The king was to be captivated with all the greater certainty by Herodias’ own daughter; another dancer would not have made the same impression upon him.

Mar_6:23. ἝΩς ἩΜΊΣΟΥς Κ . Τ . Λ .] in accordance with Est_5:3. See in general, Köster, Erläut. p. 194. It is thus that the unprincipled man, carried away by feeling, promises. The contracted form of the genitive belongs to the later manner of writing. Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 347. The article was not requisite. Heindorf, ad Phaed. p. 176.

Mar_6:25. Observe the pertness of the wanton damsel. As to θέλω ἵνα (Mar_10:35 : I will that thou shouldst, etc.), see on Luk_6:31.

Mar_6:26. περίλυπος ] on account of what was observed at Mar_6:20.

διὰ τοὺς ὅρκους κ . τ . συνανακ .] emphatically put first, as the determining motive.

αὐτὴν ἀθετῆσαι ] eam repmdiare. Examples of ἈΘΕΤΕῖΝ , referred to persons (comp. Heliod. vii. 26: ΕἸς ὍΡΚΟΥς ἈΘΕΤΟῦΜΑΙ ), may be seen in Kypke, I. p. 167 f. The use of the word in general belongs to the later Greek. Frequent in Polybius.

Mar_6:27. ΣΠΕΚΟΥΛΆΤΩΡΑ ] a watcher, i.e. one of his body-guard. On them also devolved the execution of capital punishment (Seneca, de ira, i. 16, benef. iii. 25, al.; Wetstein in loc.) The Latin word (not spiculator, from their being armed with the spiculum, as Beza and many others hold) is also adopted into the Hebrew ñô÷ìèåø . See Lightfoot and Schoettgen, also Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 1533. The spelling σπεκουλάτορα (Lachm. Tisch.) has decisive attestation.

[98] Mentioning even the name of Philip. Josephus, Antt. xviii. 5. 4, names him by the family name Herodes, which does not necessitate the supposition of a confusion as to the name on the part of Mark (Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 51). Only we may not understand Philip the tetrarch, but a half-brother of his, bearing a similar name. See on Mat_14:3.

[99] Comp. Buttmann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1860, p. 349. It is to be explained: he was perplexed about many things; what he heard from John was so heart-searching and so closely touched him. On ἀπορεῖν τι as equivalent to περί τινος , see Krüger on Thuc. v. 40. 3; Heindorf, ad Plat. Crat. p. 409 D.

[100] The appropriateness of the day is then stated in detail by ὅτε Ἡρώδης κ . τ . λ . Hence I do not deem it fitting to write, with Lachmann (comp. his Prolegom. p. xliii.), , τε .