Judas1 therefore was present ;2 cf. the Kdvrsg, x.r.X. (all, etc.) in Mark xiv. 23, and vXqv, x.r.X. (but, etc.) in Luke xxii. 21. —
1 i.e. In ver. 21 it is said, " AND AS THEY WERE EATING, He said, " Verily, I say unto you that one of you (sc. of those who were then at table) shall betray Me." The repetition of the expression, And as they were eat- iny, implies, in Bengel's opinion, that the act was continuous, and that those spoken of in ver. 21, concerning whom it was said that one of them should betray our Lord, were all, including the traitor, still present. — (I. B.)
2 I will state, in a summary form, the arguments, independent of the one given above, on which this proposition which I maintain, rests : —
1. If Judas had departed before the singing of the hymn, he would have been doing the same as if one in the present day were to depart before the offering of the grace and prayers at the close of a banquet, and would have thereby the more disclosed his atrocious design.
2. During the continuance of our Lord's supplications on the Mount of Olives, Judas had no lack of time sufficient for bringing the cohort to effect his purpose.
3. Luke, ch. xxii. 21, immediately subjoins after the words of the Institution, these words, BUT, NEVERTHELESS (TrA'/jy), behold the hand of him that betrayeth Me is with Me on the table ; and as this very complaint is placed before the Lord's Supper by Matthew and Mark, these speeches [that as to Judas, and that in which the Institution took place] cannot be severed from one another.
4. To explain our Lord's words (Luke xxii. 21) of the table, in the sense, the counting-board [of the chief priests] on which Judas' hand was laid, with Jesus as the merchandize which he offered for sale, is out of place ; for (1) It is not the seller that is said to be with the merchandize, but the mer chandize with the seller [whereas Jesus says that Judas is with Him]; (2) Thirty pieces of silver was riot so large a sum as to suggest the idea of a counting-board or banking-table ; (3) The money had been already reckoned out to Judas, Matt. xxvi. 15 ; (4) The /Soi), Behold, Luke xxii. 21, implies, in fact, the presence of the traitor, as reclining at the same banqueting table with Jesus (comp. Luke xxii. 30, xvi. 21), and dipping his hand in the dish.
5. The words TTAJJJ/ ilw, But, nevertheless, behold, being taken in their usual sense, are we to say that the traitor was driven away from the bread and the cup after these had been blessed ? But Mark, after having made mention of the twelve, ch. xiv. 17, immediately subjoins the statement, that they ALL drank of the cup, ver. 23, with which comp. Matt. xxvi. 27.
6. If you say, the traitor was known to John or even to Peter already, on the preceding day, how, then, is it that they, not till now, one by one, are represented as having said, Is it I? For, in fact, when John, in a covert way, made enquiry, it was in a secret manner that the traitor was disclosed to him : and as to his having informed Peter of the fact, it is easier to sus pect than to affirm this. The remaining nine disciples did not even observe