XXIV. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐἐελθὼν ὁ
προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἐπιδεῖξαι αὐτῷ τὰς οἰκοδομὰς τοῦ ἱεροῦ. 2. ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ” εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Od βλέπετε πάντα ταῦτα ὃ; ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὗ μὴ ἀφεθῇ ὧδε λίθος ἐπὶ λίθον, ὃς οὐ μὴ * " καταλυθή- ϱ
2» σεταιν.
> ~ c ‘ 3 297 , ές 3 A ς a) ’ lol αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ κατ ἰδίαν, λέγοντες, '' Εἰπὲ ἡμῖν, πότε ταῦτα
3 + 3 ΄ κ. ae al Ιησοῦς ἐπορεύετο Gro του ἱερου
3. Καθημένου δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τοῦ ὄρους τῶν ἐλαιῶν, προσῆλθον
287
καὶ a parall. Ch. XXvi. 61. Acts vi. 14. 2Cor. ν.1. Gal. ii. 18. again vv 27, 37, 39; nowhere else in Gospp., frequent
a ~ A , 4 ~ ΄ ἔσται; καὶ τί τὸ σημεῖον τῆς σῆς ” παρουσίας, καὶ τῆς ὅ "συντελείας {η Epistles.
¢c vide Ch. xiii. 39.
1 απο τον tepov επορευετο in $$BDI_AZ (so modern editors),
3 For ο δε Ιησους NBDL ai. versions have 9 δε αποκριθεις without Incovs.
ὅταντα παντα in SBCLX ail. ‘ un wanting in NBCDLXAZ al.
done now: it remains only to die.—éws av εἴπητε: a future contingency on which it depends whether they shall ever see Him again (Weiss in Meyer). He will not trouble them any more till their mood change and they be ready to re- ceive Him with a Messianic salutation.
The exquisite finish of this discourse, in the case of ordinary orators, would suggest premeditation and even writing. We have no means of knowing to what extent Jesus had considered beforehand what He was to say on this momentous occasion. The references to the whited sepulchres and the tombs of the prophets show that the speech was in part at least an extempore utterance.
CHAPTER XXIV. THE APOCALYPTIC Discourse. This chapter and _ its synoptical parallels (Mk. xiii., Lk. xxi.) present, in many respects, the most difficult problem in the evangelic records. Many questions may be, have been, asked concerning this discourse on things to come. Which of the three versions comes nearest to what Jesus said? Did He say all that is here reported on this occasion, or have we in all the versions, more or less, a combination of words spoken at different times? Were the words here collected, all of them, or even the greater number of them, ever spoken by Jesus at any time; have the evan- gelists not worked up into the discourse a Jewish, or Jewish-Christian, apoca- lypse, or given us a composition of their own, consisting of certain logia of the Master, as the nucleus, with addi- tions, modifications, and comments in the light of subsequent events? Finally, what is the didactic significance of the discourse, what did Jesus mean to teach His disciples respecting the themes treated: the Ruin of the Holy City,
D has the words in same order as T. R,
5 της omitted in SBCL 1, 33 al.
the Coming of the Son of Man, and the End of the Age, and the connection between these things? A history of opinion on these topics cannot here be given; aconfident attempt at answering the questions propounded I am not pre- pared to make; perhaps a final satis- factory solution of the problem is not attainable. I offer only a few general considerations which may, at least, help readers to assume aright attitude towards the problem, and to bring to the study of the discourse a sympathetic spirit.
αχ. The time was suitable for some such utterance. The situation was this: Jesus expecting death in a few days; convinced that the moral and religious condition of the Jewish people is hope- lessly bad, and that it must ere long end in disaster and ruin; surrounded by friends who are to be, after the decease of their Master, the missionaries of a new faith in a troublous time, when an old world is going down and a new world is coming into being. Here surely is an occasion to provoke the prophetic mood! At such supreme crises pro- phetic utterances, apocalyptic forecasts, are inevitable. Here they are, whom- soever we have to thank forthem, From whom are they more likely to have pro- ceeded than from Him who had such clear insight into the moral forces at work, and into the spiritual phenome- nology of the time ?