[3169] Godet has shown objections against all previous interpretations. But his own view seems to me equally untenable.
[3170] St. Luke v. 39 seems either a gloss of the writer, or may be (though very doubtfully) an interpolation. There is a curious parallel to the verse in Ab. iv. 20.
[3171] St. Luke vii. 18-35; St. Matt. xi. 2-19.
[3172] St. Mark vi. 20.
[3173] This is both the correct reading and rendering.
[3174] The distinction between the two expressions will be further explained in the sequel.
[3175] St. Luke vii. 21.
[3176] Negative criticism charges St. Luke with having inserted this trait, forgetting that it is referred to by St. Matthew.
[3177] St. Matt. xi. 5.
[3178] The two terms are different. The query was: would they go out to gaze at' a reed, and to see' one in soft clothing.
[3179] The reader will mark the difference between the quotation as made by all the three Evangelists, and our present Hebrew text and the LXX., and possibly draw his own inferences.
[3180] St. Luke vii. 29, 30.
[3181] This is a sort of parenthetic note by St. Luke.
[3182] St. Matt. xi. 12-14.
[3183] St. Matt. xi. 14-19.
[3184] The common interpretations of this verse have seemed to me singularly unsatisfactory.
[3185] Comp. the Appendix on the Jewish Interpretation of Prophecy.
[3186] Sanh. 99 a; Ber. 34 b; Shabb. 63 a.
[3187] The pipe was used both in feasts and at mourning. So the Messianic hope had both its joyous and its sorrowful aspect.
[3188] Literally, justified. The expression is a Hebraism.
[3189] I cannot accept the reading works' in St. Mark.
[3190] St. John i. 11-13.
[3191] As, according to Josephus, John was executed at Machærus, the scene must have been there, and not either at Tiberias or at Julias.
[3192] The expression gensia leaves it doubtful, whether it was the birthday of Herod or the anniversary of his accession. Wieseler maintains that the Rabbinic equivalent (Ginuseya, or Giniseya) means the day of accession, Meyer the birthday. In truth it is used for both. But in Abod. Z. 10 a (about the middle) the Yom Ginuseya is expressly and elaborately shown to be the day of accession. Otherwise also the balance of evidence is in favour of this view. The event described in the text certainly took place before the Passover, and this was the time of Herod's death and of the accession of Antipas. It is not likely, that the Herodians would have celebrated their birthdays.
[3193] From the circumstance that Josephus calls him Herod and not Philip, a certain class of critics have imputed error to the Evangelists (Schürer, u. s., p. 237). But it requires to be kept in view, that in that case the Evangelists would be guilty not of one but of two gross historical errors. They would (1) have confounded this Herod with his half-brother Philip. the Tetrarch, and (2) made him the husband of Herodias, instead of being her son-in-law, Philip the Tetrarch having married Salome. Two such errors are altogether inconceivable in so well-known a history, with which the Evangelists otherwise show such familiarity. On the other hand, there are internal reasons for believing that this Herod had a second name. Among the eight sons of Herod the Great there are three who bear his name (Herod). Of only one, Herod Antipas, we know the second name (Antipas). But, as for example in the case of the Bonaparte family, it is most unlikely that the other two should have borne the name of Herod without any distinctive second name. Hence we conclude, that the name Philip, which occurs in the Gospels (in St. Luke iii. 19 it is spurious), was the second name of him whom Josephus simply names as Herod. If it be objected, that in such case Herod would have had two sons named Philip, we answer (1) that he had two sons of the name Antipas, or Antipater, (2) that they were the sons of different mothers, and (3) that the full name of the one was Herod Philip (first husband of Herodias), and of the other simply Philip the Tetrarch (husband of Salome, and son-in-law of Herodias and of Herod Philip her first husband). Thus for distinction's sake the one might have been generally called simply Herod, the other Philip.