• .\ similar view Is taken 1>\ Mnupl, i*. I:t;t f, ftn,l appnr.-iitly also by Hrnslon tllolltmAnn, 'XftiUit. Thro:, 1. St.', n.^. ttut coni mended itself to the writer of this lnde|H'ndel:th .
636
JESUS CHRIST
JKSUS CHRIST
that til tbe discourse of Mk IS I tliore Is lncor|ionilt'»l a * Uttlo A pornlvpsf ' of ,Iew(>h ( Wi-lzsacker) or .lewlsh-l'lirlsllari (Colarit, PlIcliU'nT, Wt'lllViibnrhl orlKln, usimlly nirnnliil ns s ' lly- shfet * cuiiiiH»st'<l in A.f. (i"-(i^ ilurliit: llu" Irouhk-s whti-h Imrnf- dluti'lv nrciiikd tliu sli'fc'f of .ItTusalciii, niid Idiiitllli'd wllh ihu •oniffe' wlilcb led to thu lllfht of tin- Chiistluiis to ri-llu (K"». UK IM. V. 31. Tho llri-t to lilt Ujioii thi* Idia "iis CoIbiiI (.W«mii Chrint ft Uh Cntyiiucff* Mi'xHuiniiiueM ttt Mm TfiiifiK, od. 'i, IMVI, [1. 'iOI ID. who wiut follosvod by WuizsAckor, IMloldi-rt-r, and on an cliiboriitc »c;iU> by Wiliri'lil'mcb. Vir WuilfikiiiiJU- 0,'litnkni .IfMii, Lolpzlf, I'iTS. Tills la^lnnimd work Is ur.uidly rcfeiTiMl to ns Imvliic oslabllsbed the position. In the Ilnal form of tlio tbt'orv tin* • Ilv-shfi't * in (jiu'stlon Is suppoM-<l to consist ol .\l k W'-^" i "-*' ><-=;;w^i|. And It Is true tbat lliusc viT.si'S art' fairly detachable IVoiii the rest and make a fairly compact wnole.
l!v thus elliiiinatlni; tho central passage on which the eschalo- lot'iial teaching of .lesus seemed to rest. It became not very dilHeult to cvplain nwnv that teachlni; allotrellier. Weltl'enbacli ril.l s.> bv the hvpotbesls that the crilieally verlllcd allusions to the Second I'olillni.' of tho .Messiah all lulk-inally referrisl to //i« JtfHUrreclioii, the predictions of which foniiiil the genuine nucleus out of which tlie rest had crown Ihroucb iiiisunder- slandinir of the words of .lesus and the blelidinf with them of current opocalyptic doctrines. Ify this expedient, Weitl'unbach, whoso oliiecl was lens radical than that of most of those who Went with him, escaped some real dlllicultles ; but Just III this U may be donbtecl whether he has found any follower. It will bo seen that the critical analysis of Mk lit II is the startinK-point of the whole construction ; and that has not perhaps as yet been brought to any Ilnal noiutiou.
iv. The L'ist Supper.— 'T\\e p.irt of tlie Last Supper of wliich it i.s most incuiiibfiit upon us to sjieak Irtc is its culmination in the solemn acts and words which institute the second of the two f;reat Sacraments. Ik-sitles the debates of centuries which have yatliered round thi.s subject, a number of questions have been raised in recent years which require discussion. In particular, new lit;ht has been thrown upon the text of one of our leading authorities. And our first step iiuist be to deter- mine as neai'lv as we can its exact bearlnj;.
(1) The rixt of Lk iL'"--".— 'J'he importance of this .section is such, and it is so desirable that the evidence should be given with completeness and precision, that we may be forgiven if in this instance we print the full text of the original (after Greek KV), and then proceed to give the more crucial variants in technical fashion.
The evidence of the leading Ijitin MSS is piven in filll ; that of the two oldest forms of the Syriac Version in a rctransiation, based for the Sinai MS on .Mrs. Lewis and Merx, and for the Curetonian on liaethcen. For the Coptic Version tho now critical edition is used (Oxford, 1898).
T.k 22**-**. ** Kac ore eyeVf TO 7} wpa, aceVf <Tf , KaX oi airdiTToAoi <ri''f avTU. 1* icai etirc irpbc auTOii?, 'V,niOv^na ineBviirfaa tcOto TO iTaiTx'a tbaytlf tied' iffxCtv npb Toil fif TTa$eiV I'' Atyuiydp vtni't oTi oil /jtij tiidym avTo, tujs iJTOv ttAtjpw^/j eV T^ jSaaiAeia Tou &eov. *^ Kai 5t^a|xeco« TTOTjjptoi" tv\apnTTrjaa^ fine, Ao ^«Te ToyTO, Kai 6iaiJ.fpiiraTf ei? «aeTou?* *" \iytit yap u/ite, on oe ;i>j iriw an'o ToD viiv aiTO Toil yefeijixaTO? tt)? ajuTreAou «(u? orou t) fiatri-^eia Toy 0«ou «A^p. '" Kat Kafiiuv apTov eij\a.pt.aTri(ra^ ticAaffc, Kax c&iuKfv aiiToii AeYwf , ToOto cffTt to o-ui/ia poo To eirep epuo- 6i66p.ei'0v' rovro iToteiTe f K Ti7f ifuriv avdtivijatv. *^ Kai To iroTTJpioi' uxrttuTwc fxtTa TO iciircjjiTot AeYwc, ToiiTO to woTvpioi' i} itaifT) SiaBiJKT) eV Tw aip-aTL jiiou, TO oirep o/iiui' iKxvv6p.tvOf.
Locum iiite(iri'm htibnt Codd. Orac. ft Vfrns. nmn., Ua Uiittuin tentifitUi fxceptin <jiti infra nominantur ; item Latt. cfq Vulg. ; agnoncunt, Tert. adv. Marc. iv. 40; Eu». Can.: Bas. qjia Jeruntur Ettiica; Cyril. Alex. Comm in Luc.
Om. vv.i«-"-i« Cod. Copt. tt(Catena Cursoniana, atctrptc ut videtur Tito [Bunfrensi]).
Om. vv.i'-i« j^ect. 32, Pesh. codd.
Om. vv.'^*^ TO itirep viiOtv BiSofi. — eKxvv6p.evov, D a if' 1 1.
lisdfm omiHuiA irani*p. vv."-t8 Ha ut partfm v.ifl pri- orfm fetjuantur b e. [" Dico eniin vobis, tpiiaex hoc non manducabo illud. donee ... in regno dei. i" Kt, accepto pane, gratlas cgit, et fi-egit, et dedit lllls. " dicens : Hoc est corpus iiieum. Kt accepto calice, gratins epit ; et dixit : Accipite hoc et dividite inter vos^ " dico eiiim vobis, quod non bibam de gcneratione hac vitis bujus, donee regnum dei veniat. '> Verumtanien ecce manus. etc. b w Dico enim vobis quia jam non aianducabo illud doneque adimploar in regno di. '* et accepit panem et gratins eglt et fl-egit et dedit els i' dicens hoc est corpus meu. Kt accepit calice et gratias egit et dixit accipite vivlte inter vos. dico enim vobis amodo non vh-aiii <«/c> amodo de potlone vitis quoadusquo regnum di veniat verum ecce manus, etc. ej.