, ΄ ~ / % 22. Τότε προσηνέχθη 1 αὐτῷ δαιμονιζόμενος τυφλὸς καὶ κωφός: καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτόν, ὥστε τὸν τυφλὸν Kal? κωφὸν καὶ λαλεῖν καὶ
ν Mk. ii. x2, βλέπειν. Lk. viii. <6 Acts οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς Δαβίὸ ;” ii. 7,
wirCont δα 13; Vii.34. τῶν δαιµονίων.
x Lk. xi. 17
23. καὶ ᾿ ἐξίσταντο πάντες of ὄχλοι καὶ ἔλεγον, “Myre
c 7 - 24. Ot δὲ Φαρισαῖοι ἀκούσαντες εἶπον,
124]. εεΟῦτος οὐκ ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια, εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ BeehLeBodd ἄρχοντι 25. Εἰδὼς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς δ τὰς ἐνθυμήσεις αὐτῶν
Rev.. xvii, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Maca βασιλεία μερισθεῖσα kal’ ἑαυτῆς * ἐρημοῦται:
16; αν. 16.
καὶ πᾶσα πόλις ἢ οἰκία μερισθεῖσα Kab’ ἑαυτῆς, οὗ σταθήσεται.
1B Cur. Syr. Cop. have προσηνεγκαν with SatpoviLopevov τυφλον και κωφον. Most MSS. asin T.R. W.H. adopt the reading of B, putting T. R. in the margin.
2 S$BD and some versions omit τυφλον και, also the και before λαλειν.
> SBD omit o Ίησους.
self a stranger to weakness. ---ἠρέτισα (ver. 18), an Ionic form in use in Hellen- istic Greek, here only in N. T., often in Sept. = αἱρέομαι. Hesychius under ἠρετισάμην gives asequivalents ἠγάπησα, ἐπιθύμησα, ἠθέλησα, ἠράσθην.- κραυγά- σει (ver. 19), late form for κράζω. Phry-
nichus, p. 337, condemns, as illiterate, -
use of κραυγασµός instead οΓκεκραγµός. On the words οὐδὲ kp. Pricaeus remarks : ‘“‘Sentio clamorem intelligi qui nota est animi commoti et effervescentis”. He cites examples from Seneca, Plutarch, Xenophon, εἰς. --- ἀκούσει is late for ἀκούσεται. Verbs expressing organic acts or states have middle forms in the future (vide Rutherford, New Phrynichus, pp. 138, 376-412).—€ws, ver. 20, followed by subjunctive, with ἄν, asin classics, in a clause introduced by ἕως referring to a future contingency. —7@ ὀνόματι, ver. 21, dative after ἐλπιοῦσιν; in Sept., Is. xlii. 4, with ἐπί. This construction here only in N. T.
Vv. 22-37. Demoniac healed and Pharisaic calumny repelled (Mk. iii. 22-30; Lk. xi. 14-23—cf. Mt. ix. 32-34). The healing of a blind and dumb demoniac has its place here not for its own sake, as a miracle, but simply as the introduction to another conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees. It is a story of wicked calumny repelled. The transition from the fair picture of the true Jesus to this hideous Pharisaic caricature is highly dramatic in its effect.
Vv. 22, 23. τυφλὸς καὶ κωφός, blind 5 wellasdumb. The demoniac in ix. 32 dumb only. But dumbness here also is the main feature; hence in last clause κωφὸν only, and λαλεῖν before βλέπειν.--- ὥστε with infinitive, expressing here not merely tendency but result.—Ver. 23. ἐξίσταντο: not implying anything ex-
ceptionally remarkable in the cure; a standing phrase (in Mark at least) for the impression made on the people. They never got to be familiar with Christ’s wonderful works, so as to take them as matters of course. —pyjre im- plies a negative answer: they can hardly believe what the fact seems to suggest = can this possibly be, etc. 2 Not much capacity for faith in the average Israelite, yet honest-hearted compared with the Pharisee.—6 vtds Δαβιδ: the popular title for the Messiah.
Ver. 24. Οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι. They of course have a very different opinion. In Mark these were men come down from Jerusalem, to watch, not to lay hold of Jesus, Galilee not being under the direct jurisdiction of the Sanhedrim then (vide on Mark).— Otros οὐκἐκβάλλει, etc. : theory enunciated for second time, unless ix. 34 be an anticipation by the evangelist, or a spurious reading. What diversity of opinion! Christ’s friends, according to Mark, thought Him “ beside himself ”’—mad, Messiah, in league with Beelzebub! Herod had yet another theory: the marvellous healer was John redivivus, and endowed with the powers of the other world. All this implies that the healing ministry was a great fact. — οὐκ . . . et μὴ: the negative way of putting it stronger than the positive. The Pharisees had to add εἰ py. They would gladly haveesaid: ‘‘ He does not cast out devils at all”. But the fact was undeniable; therefore they had to in- vent a theory to neutralise its signifi- cance.—Gpxovrt, without article, might mean, as prince, therefore able to com- municate such power. So Meyer, Weiss, et al. But the article may be omitted after Βεελζεβοὺλ as after βασιλεύς, or on account of the following genitive.