30—34.
147
33. ot δὲ βόσκοντες ἔφυγον, καὶ ἀπελθόντες εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἀπήγγειλαν
πάντα, καὶ τὰ τῶν δαιμονιζοµένων.
ὅπως ὃ * µεταβῇ ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρίων αὐτῶν.
34- καὶ ἰδού, maga ἡ πόλις ἐξῆλθεν εἰς συνάντησιν 1 τῷ” ᾿Ιησοῦ: καὶ ἰδόντες αὐτόν, παρεκάλεσαν
k Ch. χὶ.τ͵, xii. 9; xv. ag (with ἐκεῖθεν).
1 For συναντησιν (CLAZ) SB 1, 33, have υπαντησιν (Tisch., W.H.), a preferable
word. Vide below.
2 For tw (B) ΝΟ have τον, adopted by Tisch. and put in margin by W.C,
3 For οπως B has wa.
tiles who did not object to eat suffocated animals, the owners would escape loss. But the learned commentator might be jesting, for he throws out the suggestion for the benefit of men whom he describes as neither Jews, Gentiles, nor Christians.
Vv. 33-34. The sequel. ἔφυγον: the swineherds fled. No wonder, in view of ‘such a disaster. If the demoniacs, in the final paroxysm before return to ‘sanity, had anything to do with bringing it about, the superstitious terror with which they were regarded would add to ‘the Ῥαπίο.--ἀπήγγειλαν: they reported what had happened to their masters and to everybody they met in the town.— πάντα, what had befallen the swine.— καὶ τὰ τ. δαιμονιζοµένων: they could not know the whole truth about the demoniacs. The reference must be to some visible connection between the behaviour of the madmen and the destruction of the herd. They told the story from their own point of view, not after interviewing Jesus and His com- pany.—Ver. 34. πᾶσα ἡ πόλις: an ex- aggeration of course, cf. accounts in Mark and Luke.—eis ὑπάντησιν . . to a meeting with Jesus. The noun occurs again in Matt. xxv. 1, and John xii. 13; im Matt. xxv. 6 ἀπάντησιν is used instead of it. eis ἆπαν. occurs in
Sept. for map. The two nouns
are little used in Greek authors. The change from:one to the other in Matt. xxv.1,6impliesaslight difference in mean- ing; ὑπάντησις = accidental chance, or stealthy meeting ; ἀπάντησις = an open designed meeting. The stealthy charac- ter of the meeting implied in ὑπὸ is well illustrated in ὑπήντησαν, ver. 28, of this narrative. The statement that the whole city went out to meet Jesus implies a report laying the blame of the occurrence on Him. But Matthew’s account is ‘very summary, and must be supple- mented by the statements in Mark and Luke, from which it appears that some
came from the town to inquire into the matter, ‘“‘to see what had happened,” and that in the course of their inquiries they met Jesus and learned what they had not known before, the change that had come over the demoniac. It was on their giving in their report to their fellow-townsmen, connecting the cure with the catastrophe, that the action re- ported in ver. 34 took place.—Ver. 34. παρεκάλεσαν: same word as in ver. 31 in reference to the demoniacs. They did not order or drive Him out. They besought in terms respectful and even subdued. They were afraid of this strange man, who could do such wonder- ful things; and, with all due respect, they would rather He would withdraw from their neighbourhood.
This would be an oft-told tale, in which different versions were sure to arise, wherein fact and explanation of fact would get mixed up together. The very variations in the synoptical accounts witness to its substantial historicity. The apologist’s task is easy here, as distinct from that of the harmonist, which is difficult. The essential outline of the story is this. A demoniac, alias a madman, comes from the tombs in the limestone caves to meet Jesus, exhibiting in behaviour and conversation a double consciousness. Asked his name, he calls himself Legion. In the name of the ‘‘ Legion ” he begs that the demons may enter the swine. Jesus orders the demons to leave their victim. Shortly after a herd of swine feeding on the hills rushed down the steep into the sea and were drowned. Tradition connected the rush of the swine with the demons leaving their former victim and entering into them. But, as already remarked, the causal connection could not be a matter of observation but only of in- ference. The rush might, as Weiss suggests, be caused by the man, in his final paroxysm, chasing them. But that also is matter of conjecture. The