* A similar tendency enier(»-es in the two miracles of liealingf reported by Mk. alone, in which the spittle of Jesus conies to the aid of His omnipotence (7-« 823) ; ;„ the healing of the blind, t^e narrator pictures to himself a gradual advance towards perfect vision (82-1. 25).
redactor of Mk. to give a sharper distinction to the two days (ll'^-'" and 1P"-13') by means of the two morning walks from Bethany to Jerusalem (1I'2-™). A third indication of the artificiality of Mk.'s arrangement is seen in 14*^, where Jesus speaks in such a manner as to imjjly that He had taught in the Temple for several days. But according to the said scheme, again, the whole of the teaching at this time occupies but a single day (ll-''-I2''^), or, at most, two days if we include also the day of the Cleansing. Hence Ave are justified in inferring that the diary is not only not organic to the events, but actually at variance with them. In fact, the sayings and discourses at Jerusalem, as set down in Mk., give no hint what- ever of a chronological order. They are as exempt from time references as are the five controversies of Mk 2'-3''. The true design of either series is to illustrate the antagonism between Jesus and the hierarchy, and they may have been uttered either on one day or on several successive days.
We Avould therefore hazard the suggestion that our Mk.'s tabulation of the interval under con- sideration, and notably the passage 11"- '2, is due to the redactor, and that the latter was imbued with the Johannine tradition. For our own part, indeed, Ave have been able to collate a mass of evidence in support of the theory that the text of Mk. has been very thoroughly revised from the Johannine standpoint, that a host of Johannine characteristics were inserted into it at some period subsequent to its use by MattheAv and Luke. It is, of course, impossible here to submit the detailed proof of such a theory, and Ave can but invite the reader to test it for himself. The design of the present article does not carry us beyond the advocacy and proof of the thesis : As originally the Synoptic tradition neither contained a com- plete diary of our Lord's last visit to Jerusalem, nor implied that His stay covered exactly one Aveek, it is in the last resort to Jn. that we must trace the order of our Pas.sion Week. See also art. Dates.
Literature. — J. Weiss, Das dlteste Evangelhim, 1903 ; C. A. Briggs, New Light on the Life of Jesus (1904), 101 ff. ; A. G. Mortimer, Meditations on the Passion (1903) ; R. Winterbotham, Sermons in Holy Trinity Church (1900), 140-184.
J. Weiss. PASSOVER (I.) (Heb. nps pesah, Aram, xrips pasha, in (ireek wdcrxo., <paaiK, and 0dcr/ca [Jos.], NT Trdo-xa). — The most distinctive festival of the JeAvish religion. Its origin, significance, and method of celebration are giA^en in Ex 12'"'*^ 23'^ 3425, Lv 23«-8, Nu 91-" 2816-25, Dt W-\*
Modern criticism has discovered certain variations in the ritual and significance, has distinguished layers and stages in the ideas the festival was to suggest, and has sought to connect it with earlier and ethnic rites. Without accepting all such contentions, it may be granted that there is, at least, the union of an agricultural feast with a commemoration of the Exodus out of Egypt, in which commemoration certain of the circum- stances which marked the historic deliverance are more or less literally repeated. Jewish expositors distinguish between ' the Egyptian Passover' and those which were subsequently ob- ser\'ed, — ' the perpetual Passover ' or ' Passover for the genera- tions,'— and narrate the points in which they differ from each other ; in the former the impure partook, the blood was sprinkled on the lintels, the fat was not burned, and no hymn was sung ; with other details.
The references in the OT to the observance of this festival are comparatively rare. There was the observance at the time of the Exodus, in the second year after coming out of Egypt (Nu 9^), at the entry into Canaan (Jos 5'"- "). The feast was apparently observed during the reign of Solomon (2 Ch 8'-*). Under Hezekiah there Avas a great act of observance, but in the second month, when the feast Avas prolonged by one Aveek, and even the
* The derivation of the word is uncertain. It may be derived from a root meaning to leap or pass over, used of the sun at the spring-time ; or to pass over, in the sense of sparing, the tradi- tional meaning.
PASSOVER
PASSOVER
325
Levitically unclean were permitted to participate (3()i5-23| \i^i i\^Q period of the revival of religion during the reign of Josiah, there was another cele- bration that stood out conspicuously among the memories of the festival (2 K 2^, 2 Ch 95'-''). One Passover is also recorded a.s kept by the returning exiles (Ezr 6'^). With the period of the NT writers, of Josephus, and the Mishna, the feast has become one of regular observance, drawing multitudes to Jerusalem from many lands, and forming a strong bond of unit}' to the scattered nation.
From the references outside of the Pentateuch little can be learnt as to the details of the celebra- tion of this feast. Nor is much to be gathered from the NT apart from the history of the Last Supper, regarding which there is doubt as to whether it was a true Paschal celebration, and whether the ordinary ritual was observed, or whether it was purposely modified and departed from (see follow- ing art. and Last Supper). We are driven for information as to the order and details of cele- bration to the Mishna {c. .\.D. 200), the Gemaia, an ancient supplement of the same, the commen- taries of later Jewish Rabbis, as Maimonides and Bartenora. Theie is consei|uently a certain doubt as to how far the practices enjoined in the Mishna were observed in the time of our Lord ; but, since the traditions are for the most part very ancient, the regulations laid down give a fairlj- accurate representation of the feast as observed at the time of the Evangelists.