[3279] St. Matt. xv. 21.
[3280] St. Mark vi. 45.
[3281] St. John xii. 21.
[3282] I have myself counted twelve different places in England bearing names which might be freely rendered by Bethsaidsa,' not to speak of the many suburbs and quarters which bear a like designation, and, of course, my list is anything but complete.
[3283] In Jer. Megill. (p. 70 a, line 15 from bottom) we read of a {hebrew}, but the locality scarcely agrees with our Beth-Saida.
[3284] St. Mark vi. 45.
[3285] St. John vi. 17.
[3286] Comp. Bäedeker (Socin) Paläst. page 270.
[3287] St. John i. 44; xii. 21.
[3288] St. Mark i. 29.
[3289] May this connection of Capernaum and Beth-Saida account for the mention of the latter as one of the places which had been the scene of so many of His mighty works (St. Matt. xi. 21; St. Luke x. 13)?
[3290] St. John vi. 59.
[3291] There is no article in the original.
[3292] St. John vi. 22-24.
[3293] St. Mark vi. 53.
[3294] Jewish War iii. 10.7, 8.
[3295] Pes. 8 b; Meg. 6 a; Ber. R. 98.
[3296] Bäedeker (Socin) has grouped together the reasons against identifying Khân Minyeh with Capernaum itself.
[3297] St. Matt. xiv. 34-36; St. Mark vi. 53-56.
[3298] Mr. Brown McClellan (N.T. vol. i. p. 570) holds, that both the Passover and Pentecost had intervened - I know not on what grounds. At the same time the language in St. Mark vi. 56, might imply more than one occasion on which the same thing happened.
[3299] St. John vi. 22-25.
[3300] ver. 59.
[3301] St. John vi. 4.
[3302] This is propounded in Wieseler, Chronolog. Synopse, pp. 276, 290, as a possible view.
[3303] Pes. 55 a.
[3304] St. Matt. xv. 1; St. Mark vii. 1.
[3305] St. John vi. 59.
[3306] St. Matt. xv. 1 &c.
[3307] St. Matt. xv. 12-14.
[3308] St. John vi. 60-66.
[3309] St. Matt. xv. 10; St. Mark vii. 14, 15.
[3310] St. Matt. xv. 12-14.
[3311] St. Matt. xv. 15-20; St. Mark vii. 17-23.
[3312] St. John ix. 16, 24.
[3313] The word quite corresponds to the Jewish term. Notwithstanding the objection of the learned Bishop Haneberg (Relig. Alterth. p. 475, note 288) I believe it corresponds to the Rabbinic {hebrew} or {hebrew} (Hebr. {hebrew}) profanus, in the sense of common,' not hallowed.'
[3314] The fullest account of it within reach of ordinary readers is in the Notes to Pocock's Porta Mosis (pp. 350-402) though it is confused, not quite accurate, and based chiefly on later Jewish authorities. Spencer (de Leg. Hebr. pp. 1175-1179) only adds references to similar Gentile rites. Goodwin, even under the revision of Hottinger (pp. 182-188), is in this instance inferior to Pocock. Buxtorf (Synag. pp. 179-184) gives chiefly illustrative Jewish legends; Otho (Lex. Rabb. pp. 335, 336) extracts from his predecessors, to little advantage. The Rabbinic notes of Lightfoot, Wünsche, Schöttgen, and Wetstein give no clear account; and the Biblical Dictionaries are either silent, or (as Herzog's) very meagre. Other accounts are, unfortunately, very inaccurate.
[3315] Yadayim, in four chapters, which, however, touches on other subjects also, notably on the canonicity of certain parts of the O.T.
[3316] We refer here generally to Chull. 105 a, b, 106 b.
[3317] Sot. 4 b.
[3318] Shabb. 62 b.
[3319] Sot. 4 b.
[3320] Eduy. v. 6; Ber. 19 a.
[3321] Chull. 106 a; Bemidb. R. 20, ed. Warsh. p. 81 b.
[3322] Many illustrative stories are given of its importance, on the one hand, and of the danger of neglecting it on the other. With these legends it is not necessary to cumber our pages.
[3323] Chull. 106 a.
[3324] Chull. 106 a.
[3325] Lev xi. 44.
[3326] Ber. 53 b, end.
[3327] Erub. 17 b; Chull. 105 b.
[3328] The danger from Salt of Sodom' is specially mentioned.
[3329] Chull. 105 a, b.