408
σωσι δόλω,ὶ καὶ ἀποκτείνωσιν.
a 25
μὴ θόρυβος γένηται ἐν τῷ had.
5. ἔλεγον δέ, “ Mi ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, ἵνα
6. Tod δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦ γενοµένου ἐν Βηθανίᾳ ἐν οἰκίᾳ Σίμωνος τοῦ
bMk.xiv.3. Nempod, 7. προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ γυνὴ " ἀλάβαστρον ” µύρου ἔχουσα
Lk. vii. doubtful).
2
«ΜΗ, xiv.3 8- ἰδόντες δὲ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ὅ ἠγανάκτησαν, λέγοντες, “Eis τί
σ τα ή ἀπώλεια αὕτη;
9. ἠδύνατοδ γὰρ τοῦτο τὸ μύρονΊ πραθῆναι
1 δολω κρατησωσι in ΝΑΒΡΙ.ΔΣ (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). T.R. supported only by
minusc.
2εχουσα before αλαβαστρον pupov in BDL 13, 33, 69, etc.
3 πολυτιµον in ΜΑΡΙ, (Tisch.) as in T. R. in ΒΓΑΣ (W.H.).
probably comes from John xii. 3.
4 ew. της κεφαλης in KBD 1, 13, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). ΤΝΑΒΡΙ, al. omit το µνρον (Tisch., W.H., Ws.).
6 eSuvaro in NBLA.
craft, a method characteristic of clerics ; indigna consultatio (Bengel); cowardly and merciless—Ver. 5. ἔλεγον δὲ: δὲ points back to ver. 1, which fixes the passion in Passover time, while the Sanhedrists thought it prudent to keep off the holy season for reason given.— μὴ, etc., to avoid uproar apt to happen at Passover time, Josephus teste (B. J., Ἱ αν 3]:
Vv. Ba Anointing in Bethany (Mk. xiv. 3-9, ef. John xii. r-r1). Six days before Passover in John; no time fixed in Mt. and Mk. Certainly within Passion week. The thing chiefly to be noted is the setting of this pathetic scene, between priestly plotting and false discipleship. ‘* Hatred and baseness on either hand and true love in the midst ” a raining of the Twelve).—Ver. 6. τοῦ
2 ᾿Ιησοῦ, etc.: indicates the scene, in Bethany, and in the house of Simon known as the leper (the one spoken of in viii. 2?). The host of Lk. vii. 36 ff. was a Simon. On the other hand, the host of John xii. 1 f., or at least a pro- minent guest, was Lazarus, brother of Martha and Mary. ‘This and other points of resemblance and difference raise the question: do all the four evangelists tell the same story in different ways? On this question end- less diversity of opinion has prevailed. The probability is that there were two anointings, the one reported with variations by Mt., Mk., and John, the other by Lk.; and that the two got somewhat mixed in the tradition, so that the precise details of each cannot now be ascertained. Happily the ethical or religious import of the two beautiful
πολντιµον
5 ΦΕΓΙ, omit αυτου.
stories is clear.—Ver. 7. ἀλάβαστρον, an “alabaster” (vase), the term, originally denoting the material, being transferred to the vessel made of it, like our word ‘“olass ” (Speaker’s Com.), in common use for preserving ointments (Pliny, N.H.., iii., 3). An alabaster of nard (μύρου) was a present for a king. Among five precious articles sent by Cambyses to the King of Ethiopia was included a µύρου ἀλάβ. (Herod., iii., 20). On this ointment and its source vide Tristram, Natural History of the Bible, p. 484 (quoted in notes on Mk.).—Bapvutipov (here only in N. T.), of great price; this noted to explain the sequel.—regadjjs : she broke the vase and poured the contents: on the head of Jesus, feet in John; both possible; must be combined, say the Harmonists.—Ver. 8. ἠγανάκτησαν, as in xx. 24. The disciple-circle experienced various annoyances from first to last: Syrophenician woman, mothers and children, ambition of James and John, Mary of Bethany. The last the most singular of all. Probably all the disciples disapproved more or less. It was a woman’s act, and they were men. She was a poet and they were somewhat Ρτοβαίο.--ἀπώλεια, waste, a precious thing thrown away. To how many things the term might be applied on similar grounds! The lives of the martyrs, ¢.g., cui bono? That is the question; not so easily answered as vulgar utilitarians think. Beside this criticism of Mary place Peter’s revolt against the death of Jesus (xvi. 22).— Ver. 9. δοθῆναι, etc., to be given (the proceeds, subject easily understood) to the poor. How much better a use than