11. And He said to them, All do not receive this saying, but those E to whom it has been given.] That is, "what you say about the expediency of abstaining from marriage has some truth in it. But it is not practicable for all men, but only for some for whom providence has so destined it, e.g. physical eunuchs, and those who abstain from marriage in order to obey a religious call. If a man feels himself called to do so, let him." It is clear that if the passage be so interpreted, the disciples instead of receiving an explanation and solution of their difficulty that marriage without facility for divorce would be a burden, receive what amounts to a commendation of abstention from marriage for the kingdom's sake. In other words, whilst vv.1-9 are calculated to heighten the conception of marriage, vv.1 are clearly intended to increase respect for those who renounce marriage. This can hardly be an original connection. V.12 is probably added here by the editor simply because it is concerned in a negative way with the subject of marriage, which has been the subject of vv.1-9.

10-12

If v.11 be a historical saying of Christ, it looks very much as though it were originally connected with the exposition of Christ's about divorce as given in Mk., and not with this teaching as modified by Mt. For the saying of the disciples, that if Christ's exposition of the question of divorce were to hold good, marriage would be a burden better left alone, seems to arise naturally enough from the strict teaching that divorce is not permissible, whilst it is very unexpected in the mouths of Christ's disciples as a protest against the doctrine that divorce should be limited to cases of adultery. Could not Christ's disciples endure what the disciples of Shammai submitted to?

It might be possible to interpret the passage in a different direction by referring Tòv λóyov TOUTOV not to the question of the disciples, but to the statement by the Lord of the indissoluble character of the marriage bond, vv.1-9. "Not all can receive this estimation in their understanding and carry it into practice in their life, but those to whom it has been given by the divine grace. But these can receive it; for just as there are physicial eunuchs, so there are spiritual eunuchs, who, knowing marriage to be a sacred and indissoluble bond, abstain from it for the purpose of dedicating their lives to the kingdom." But the logical consequence of "not all receive this saying (vv.1-9) but those to whom it has been given," is not for there are some who abstain from marriage, but for there are some who recognise the sacred nature of the bond, and live married lives without recourse to divorce. The whole section in Mt. suffers from inconsistency of thought due to literary revision and compilation. (ei) μǹ ènì topveía is inconsistent with v., and whilst this verse, and the whole paragraph, 1-9, exalts marriage as an institution of the Creator; v.12, without depreciating it, emphasises

L

the duty of renouncing it under certain circumstances.-xwpeîv] "to contain," then of the mind "to contain," "receive," "hold," the saying is too sweeping to be universally received and practised.— TÒV λOYOV TOUTOV] (see above) either the dictum that it is better not to marry, or less probably the exposition of Christ that marriage is a permanent bond, and should be unbroken by divorce, vv.4-8.— οἷς δέδοται] See on 13". ὑμῖν δέδοται are those who have received spiritual insight, which enables them to receive and practise the high standard involved in "this saying."

12. For there are eunuchs who were born so from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of the heavens. He who can receive it, let him receive it.] The verse explains what is meant by ois dédora. Some there are to whom the spiritual capacity to recognise the truth of "this saying" and to practise it has been given. For just as there are physical eunuchs, i.e. men for whom natural infirmity or the cruelty of men has made marriage impossible, so that for them the saying "better not to marry" is a necessary truism; so there are some who have made themselves spiritual eunuchs, i.e. have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom, i.e. because the calls of religious duty have made marriage inexpedient. To such as these spiritual insight has been given which enables them to realise that it is better not to marry. For renunciation of earthly blessings for the sake of the kingdom, cf. vv.28. 29. The Lord may have had in mind such instances of the renunciation of marriage as the Essenes, or John the Baptist, or some among His disciples.

3. πроσεóvтes Papioaîoi] The words are omitted from Mk. by D S1a bk. If they are not genuine there, Mt. has inserted them. For his partiality for Tрoréрxeodai, see on 43; and for the insertion of the Pharisees, cf. 2284. 41, and Introduction, p. lxxviii.

4. OKTίoas] So B 1 22 33 124. Krlσas is probably a reminiscence of Mk 10", and is probably genuine.—d wohσas] of No C D Z al S1 S3 latt, though strongly attested, is probably an assimilation to the following érolnoer, and to the LXX of Gn 17. S1 Shave: "Have ye not read that He that made the male from the beginning, the female also made?" This is not the original text (Merx), but a clumsy translation which necessitates the omission of auroÚS at the end of the clause. —ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς] is taken by the editor from Mk. If he had wished to suggest the complete equality of the sexes by omitting aurous, he would also have changed the order of the words to make this clear. kal elTev is added by Mt. to separate the two quotations. It is omitted by S', but after the change of Mk.'s Kriσews into ỏ κrioas it suitably introduces the following quotation as a direct command of the Creator expressed in the words of Scripture. S'ff omit e apxs.

7. douva] S' S2 introduce a subject "that he that would dismiss his wife should give," etc.

9. The passage in Mk. runs: ôs av åñoλúσŋ τǹv yvνaîka aʊTOû kal yaμhon ἄλλην μοιχᾶται ἐπ ̓ αὐτήν· καὶ ἐὰν αὐτὴ ἀπολύσασα τὸν ἄνδρα αὐτῆς γαμήσῃ aλor μoxâтai. This has given trouble to the Syriac and Latin translators, who substitute desertion for divorce in the second clause. So S', who also

transposes the clauses: "That woman which leaveth her husband and becometh the wife of another doth indeed commit adultery, and that man which leaveth his wife and taketh another doth indeed commit adultery (Burkitt). D has κai éàv yvǹ ¿¿éλ0ŋ ảæd tоû ȧvôpós, and so in substance dabcff Wellh. Mt. inserts (el) μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ after γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, and omits the harsh en avτýv. He also omits the whole of the second clause.

BDS2 133 latt assimilate to 532 by substituting TapeKTOS NÓYou Topvelas for (el) μǹ éπì wopvela. BCN further assimilate to 52 by substituting roleî avτýv μοιχευθῆναι for μοιχᾶται. Β Ν also omit καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην for the same reason. S2 adds "against her," to assimilate to Mk.

καὶ ὁ ἀπολελυμένην γαμήσας μοιχᾶται] is omitted by NCDL SS S'a beff g1h. It seems to be a further assimilation to 532.

13-22. From Mk 1013-22.

Mk. has

13. Then were there brought children to Him, in order that He M might place His hands upon them, and pray; and the disciples rebuked them.] Mk. has: "And they were bringing children to Him, in order that He might touch them; and the disciples were rebuking them.”—TÓTE] see on 27.—рoσnνéxonσav] Tроσépeрov. Mt. substitutes aor. for imperf., as often. For Mt.'s προσέφερον. preference for passive verbs, see on 41; and cf. véxon, 1411, for ἤνεγκεν Μk. 628.τὰς χεῖρας ἐπιθῇ αὐτοῖς καὶ προσεύξηται] Mk. has simply avrov åra. Mt.'s words are an editorial explanation. -Teríμnoav] aor. for Mk.'s imperf. (A D allatt (so also Lk. & B al), but & B Teriunoav), as often.

14. And Jesus said, Allow the children, and forbid them not, to M come to Me: for of such is the kingdom of the heavens.] Mk. has: "And Jesus saw and was vexed, and said to them, Allow the children to come to Me; do not forbid them: for of such is the kingdom of God." It is usual with Mt. to omit verbs like yaváκTηoev as applied to Christ; see on 83 and 1529, and Introduction, p. xxxi.—kaì μǹ kwλúete] Mk. rather frequently in the latter part of his Gospel has no connecting link between sayings. Mt. generally supplies a particle. Lk. also has κaí here.-Tv τοιούτων ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν] i.e. many qualities characteristic of childhood are necessary to admit people into the kingdom. See on 183-5

15. Mt. here omits Mk v.15. He has anticipated it in 1884: M And having laid His hands upon them, He departea thence.] Mk. has: "And having taken them in His arms, He was blessing them, having laid His hands upon them. And as He was going forth to travel" (eis ódóv). Mt. omits Mk.'s évaykaλioάuevos, as in 182.

16. The connection of sections in Mk. 10 is probably purely topical. The relation of Christianity to the marriage question (1-12) suggested the incident of the children (13-16), and the

1 It would be natural to suppose that παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας is original here, if it were not that we should then have to explain why (el) un ènì wopvela has been substituted here only, and not in 532. The two phrases may be alternative renderings by the editor of the my 727 of the school of Shammai. See on 532.

M

M

M

relation of Christianity to wealth (17-27) followed naturally enough. Mt. simply follows Mk.'s guidance.

And, behold, one came to Him, and said, Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?] Mk. has: "And as He was going forth into the way, there ran one, and, kneeling down before Him, was asking Him, Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?”—ἐπορεύθη ἐκεῖθεν καὶ ἰδού] for Mk.'s καὶ ἐκπορευ ομένου εἰς ὁδόν. For καὶ ἰδού, see on 120 εἷς προσελθὼν αὐτῷ εἶπεν] abbreviates Mk.s προσδραμὼν εἷς καὶ γονυπετήσας αὐτὸν ἐπηρώτα αὐτόν. For προσελθών, see on 48.—διδάσκαλε] Mt., in view of his modification of the next verse of Mk., transposes "good" from "Teacher" to "what."-ox (wyr alúviov] For "eternal life," see Dalm. Words, p. 156; Volz, Jüd. Eschat. p. 368. Mk. has κληρονομήσω. "Inheritance "" is a common Jewish metaphor, to express participation in the blessings of the future; cf. Dalm. Words, 125 ff.; Volz, Jüd. Eschat. p. 306.

17. And He said to him, Why askest thou Me about the good? One is the good. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.] Mk. has: "And Jesus said to him, Why callest thou Me good? No one is good save one, God. Thou knowest the commandments." Mt.'s changes are probably intentional, to avoid the rejection by Christ of the title "good," and the apparent distinction made between Himself and God. In Mk. the meaning seems to be, "Why go out of your way to call one whom you regard as a human Teacher 'good'? Goodness is a quality of character, and belongs in any full sense to God alone. But God's goodness is revealed in His commandments, and inheritance of eternal life depends upon keeping them." Thus the words begin as a rebuke for the thoughtless use of the epithet "good," and end as an answer to the question, "What shall I do," etc. Mt., by placing "good" in the main question, is obliged to treat all that follows as a direct answer to the question. The sequence of thought seems to be, "Why askest thou Me about the good? One is good," i.e. "the good" is not an independent and limited quantity in life which can be ascertained and "done." It is an attribute of character, and that the divine character. But the goodness of the divine nature is revealed in His commandments. In order to make clear this last thought, which is already implied in Mk., the editor substitutes "But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments," for Mk.'s "thou knowest the commandments."

For Tηpev, cf. 238 "keep," i.e. a continual process, not a single act which can be begun and ended (τί ποιήσω ἀγαθόν), as a necessary preliminary to entry into life.

18. He saith to Him, Of what sort? And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour father and mother; and, Thou

shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.] Mk. has: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud." Mt. takes a severer view of the character of the questioner than Mk. By representing him as asking, "What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?" he makes the question more unintelligent than it is in Mk. Here, by inserting Xéye-ró, he emphasises the man's obtuseness. In v.20, by putting into his mouth, "What lack I yet?" he attributes to him selfsufficiency. And he omits altogether Mk v.21a. Compare the treatment in Mt 2234-40 of the questioner described in Mk 1228-34 Tоías may mean, "What sort of commandment?" cf. 2236. Or Tolos may be hardly distinguishable from rís, "Which commandments?" cf. Blass, p. 176; Win.-Schm. p. 241. See on 2442. οὐ φονεύσεις, κ.τ.λ.] Mk. has μὴ φονεύσῃς, κ.τ.λ. After μὴ ψευδομαρτυρήσης, Mk. has μὴ ἀποστερήσης (so N A B CD latt). This may be a reminiscence of Ex 2110, or Dt 2414 (LXX A F), or Ecclus 41. Mt. omits it (if it was in his text of Mk., but B S1 omit there), and substitutes after "honour father and mother," "thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." This comes from Lv 1918, and occurs again in 2239 Mk 1281 Lk 1027, whence it is here taken. The first four clauses come from Ex 2018-16 or Dt 517-20. In Mk. the order μὴ μοιχ. μὴ φον. is attested by Α Ν X al latt, but μὴ φον. μὴ μοιχ. in B C al S1. Mt. has this latter order, which is that of the Massoretic Text of Ex. and Dt., and of the LXX A F. In. Ex. B has οὐ μοιχ. οὐ κλεψ. οὐ φον., and in Dt. οὐ μοιχ. οὐ φον. οὐ κλεψ. Thus Mk. ( B C al S1) and Mt. agree in order with the Heb. (M.T.) and the LXX (A F Luc). The other order, où μox. où pov. où κλey., represented by Mk. (A N X al latt), Lk 1820, LXX (B in Dt.), Philo, is now supported by the Hebrew Papyrus published in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, xxv. pt. i. pp. 34-56. Mk. has the indicative for the conjunctive of the LXX. Mt. assimilates to the LXX.

=

19. τίμα τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα] Mk. has σου after πατέρα, Μ and in Ex. LXX B omits the second σov. Mt. ( B C D al) omits the pronoun altogether as in 15. It is twice inserted by S1 S2 and some old latt, but can hardly be genuine. This is surprising, since the tendency in Mt. is to assimilate Mk.'s quotations to LXX, not to deviate from it.

20. The young man saith to Him, All these things I observed: M what lack I yet?] Mk. has: "And he said, Teacher, all these things I observed from my youth."-ò veaviokos] Mt. has formed a nominative for the verb out of Mk.'s ek veótηtós μov, which he omits. He also omits Mk.'s διδάσκαλε, and has ἐφύλαξα for épvλaέáμn.1 The former is the New Testament form elsewhere;

1 Weiss renders this in Mk. "From all these I guarded myself." See Meyer's Comm. 6th ed. in loc., and cf. Ac 21, 2 Ti 415.