srg“ from διακαθαρίζω, late for classic αθαίρω. The idea is: He
with His fan will throw up the wheat, mixed with the chaff, that the wind may blow the chaff away; He will then collect the straw, ἄχνρον (in Greek writers usually plural τὰ ἄχνρα, vide Grimm), and burn it with fire, and collect the wheat lying on the threshing floor and store it in His granary. So shall He thoroughly (δια intensifying) cleanse His floor. And the sweeping wind and the consuming fire are the emblems and measure of His power; stronger than mine, as the tempest and the devastating flames are mightier than the stream which I use as my element. --ὅλων, a place
iz—15.
85
13. Τότε παραγίνεται 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ἐπὶ τὸν y here only;
> , 7 a ? , A lol ry 3 3 ~ Ιορδάνην πρὸς τὸν Ιωάννην, τοῦ βαπτισθῆναι bw αὐτοῦ. Ιωάννης διεκώλυεν αὐτόν, λέγων, “"Eyo *xpelav ἔχω ὑπὸ σοῦ 59.
Βαπτισθήναι, καὶ σὺ ἔρχῃ πρός pe;”
εἶπε πρὸς αὐτόν,” “"Ades " ἄρτι' οὕτω γὰρ
const.). a John xiii. 37. inf., 1 Cor. xi. 13.
1 lwavvns omitted in NB sah. vers.
in a field made firm by a roller, or ona rocky hill top exposed to the breeze.— ἀποθήκη means generally any kind of store, and specially a grain store, often underground. Bleek takes the epithet ἀσβέστῳ applied to the fire as signifying: inextinguishable till all the refuse be consumed, It is usually understood absolutely.
Vv. 13-17. Fesus appears, His baptism and its accompaniments (Mark i. 9-11; Luke wii. 21-22). Ver. 13. Τότεπαρα. ὁ ‘J... . Γαλιλαίας: then, after John had de- scribed the Messiah, appears on the scene (παραγίνεται, the historical presentagain, as in ver. I, with dramatic effect) from Galilee, where He has lived since child- hood, ¥esus, the real Christ; how widely different from the Christ conceived by the Baptist we know from the whole evangelic history. But shutting off know- ledge gathered from ‘other sources, we may obtain significant hints concerning the stranger from Galilee from the present narrative. He comes ἐπὶ τὸν |. πρὸς τὸν Ἰωαγ., τοῦ βαπτισθῆναι ὑπ) αὐτοῦ. These words at once suggest a contrast between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees. They came to the baptism as a phenome- non to be critically observed. Jesus comes fo the Jordan (emt), towards the Baptist (πρὸς) to enter into personal friendly relations with him (vide John i. I, πρὸς τὸν θεόν), in order to be baptised by him (genitive of the infinitive express- ing purpose). Jesus comes thoroughly in sympathy with John’s movement, sharing his passion for righteousness, fully appreciating the symbolic signifi- cance of his baptism, and not only willing, but eager to be baptised; the Jordan in His mind from the day He leaves home. A very different person this from the leaders of Israel, Pharisaic or Sadducaic. But the sequel suggests acontrast also between Him and John himself.
1 Cor. xiii. 12 (now, opp. to fut. time).
for force
14. ὁ δὲ of tense of. Lk. i. Acts 2 vii. 26. 15. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς z Ch. xiv. eer aye m6 16. John πρεπον εστιν ημιν xiii. Io (same
b Heb. ii. 1ο. With acc. and
(W.H. omit.)
2 For προς αυτον B and it. vg. cop. versions have avr, this reading accords best with the usage of the Evangelist.
Though weakly attested W.H. adopt it.
Vv. 14-15. Fohn refuses. It is in- structive to compare the three synoptical evangelists in their respective narratives of the baptism of Jesus. Mark (i. g) simply states the fact. Matthew reports perplexities created in the mind of John by the desire of Jesus to be baptised, and presumably in the minds of Chris- tians for whom he wrote. Luke (iii. 21) passes lightly over the event in a participial clause, as if conscious that he was on delicate ground. The three narratives exhibit successive phases of opinion on the subject, a fact not with- out bearing on the dates and relations of the three Gospels. Matthew represents the intermediate phase. His account is intrinsically credible.— Ver. 14. διεκώλυεν: imperfect, pointing to a persistent (note the διὰ) but unsuccess- ful attempt to prevent. His reason was a feeling that if either was to be baptised the relation ought to be inverted. To understand this feeling it is not necessary to import a fully developed Messianic theology into it, imputing to the Baptist all that we believe concerning Jesus as the Christ and the sinless one. It is enough to suppose that the visitor from Galilee had made a profound moral im- pression on him by His aspect and con- versation, and awakened thoughts, hopes, incipient convictions as to who He might be. Nor ought we to take two seriously the Baptist’s statement: ‘'I have need to be baptised of Thee”. Hitherto he had had no thought of being baptised himself. He was the baptiser, not one feeling need to be baptised ; the censor of sinners, not the sympathetic fellow-sinner. And just here lies the contrast between John and Jesus, and between the Christ of John’s imagina- tion and the Christ of reality. John was severe; Jesus was sympathetic. John was the baptiser of sinners; Jesus wished to be baptised, as if a sinner