Vv. 14-17. The fast-question (Mk. ii. 18-22; Lk. v. 33-39). Τότε Our evangelist makes a temporal connection
152
n in parall. Vide also
14. Τότε προσέρχονται αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ Ἰωάννου, λέγοντες,
Tobit vi.“ Διατί ἡμεῖς καὶ ot Φαρισαῖοι νηστεύομεν πολλά,ὶ ot δὲ µαθηταί
άν 17. > , Lad 02 Pet.i.13 TOU οὐ νηστεύουσι ; (same phrase). p in parall. and Ch.
XXV. I. A “ i Johnii.g; Καὶ TOTE νηστεύσουσιν. lil. 29.
εἰς,
δύνανται οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ 3 νυμφῶνος πενθεῖν, * ep’ ὅσον pet αὐτῶν ἐστιν ὁ
ς
Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “My
Pyupdios ; ἐλεύσονται δὲ ἡμέραι ὅταν " ἀπαρθῇ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν 6 νυµφίος,
16. οὐδεὶς δὲ " ἐπιβάλλει " ἐπίβλημα
Rev. xviii, *pdkous 3 ἀγνάφου ἐπὶ tpatiw παλαιῷ: “aipe γὰρ τὸ πλήρωμα
23. q here and in parall. t same phr. in Mk. ii. 41.
r here, in parall., in same sense. u without object here and in Mk. ii. 21.
Cf. Mk. xi. 7. 5 here and in parall.
1 πολλα is in a large number of uncials, including NWSCDLAX. Yet it looks like a gloss and is wanting in §*B 27, 71. Tisch. and W.H. omit.
out of what in Mark is merely topical, another of the group of incidents showing Jesus in conflict with current opinion and practice. Where it happened can- not be determined, but it is brought in appositely after the feast of the publicans, serving with it to illustrate the free unconventional life of the Jesus-circle.— προσέρχονται ... of pad. Ιωάννου. The interrogants here are John’s disciples; in Mark, unknown persons about John’s disciples with the Pharisees; in Luke, who treats this incident as a continuation of the last, the fault-finders are the same as before (ot δὲ). Mark probably gives the true state of the case. Some persons unknown, at some time or other, when other religious people were fasting, and the Jesus-circle were observed not to be fasting, came and remarked on the dis- sidence.—8.arl: the interrogants wanted to know the reason. But the important thing for us is the fact, that Jesus and His disciples did not conform to the common custom of religious people, in- cluding the disciples of the Baptist. It is the first instance of an extensive breach with existing religious usage.— οὐ νηστεύουσι: the broad patent fact; if they did any fasting it was not apparent.
Ver. 15. καὶ etwev: The question drew from Jesus three pregnant para- bolic sayings: bright, genial, felicitous impromptus; the first a happy apology for His disciples, the other two the statement of a general principle.—oi υἱοὶ τοῦ νυμφῶνος. The mere suggestion of this name for the disciples explains all. Paranymphs, friends of the bridechamber, companions of the bridegroom, who act for him and in his interest, and bring the bride to him. How can they be sad (μὴ δύνανται wevGeiv) ? The point to note is that the figure was apposite. The life of Jesus and His disciples was like a
wedding feast—they the principal actors. The disciples took their tone from the Master, so that the ultimate fact was the quality of the personal piety of Jesus. Therein lay the reason of the difference commented on. It was not irreligion, as in the case of the careless; it was a different type of religion, with a Father- God, a kingdom of grace open to all, hope for the worst, and spiritual spon- taneity.—éAevoovrat ἡμέραι. While the Bridegroom is with them life will be a wedding feast; when He is taken from them it will make a great difference; then (τότε) they will grieve, and therefore fast: a hidden allusion to the tragic end foreseen by Jesus of this happy free life, the penalty of breaking with custom. Vv. 16,17. The substitution of νησ- τεύουσιν for πενθεῖν, in the close of ver. 15, implicitly suggested a principle which is now explicitly stated in parabolic form: the great law ofcongruity ; practice must conform to mood; the spirit must determine the form. These sayings, apparently simple, are somewhat ab- struse. They must have been over the head of the average Christian of the apostolic age, and Luke’s version shows that they were diversely interpreted. Common to both is the idea that it is bootless to mix heterogeneous things, old and new in religion. This cuts two ways. It defends the old as.well as the new; the fasting of John’s-disciples as well as the non-fasting of Christ’s. Jesus did not concern Himself about Pharisaic practice, but He was concerned to defend His own disciples without disparagement of John, and also to prevent John’s way and the respect in which he was justly held from creating a prejudice against Himself. The double application of the principle was therefore present to His mind.—Ver. 16, οὐδεὶς ... παλαιῷ. No