«et
Ὁ ἐμβάψας pet ἐμοῦ ἐν τῷ τρυβλίῳ τὴν xeEtpa,? οὗτός pe wapa-k here and
ei in parall. δώσει. 24. 6 μὲν υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου } ὑπάγει, καθὼς γέγραπται! here and ne ος Pre eee 5 πώ ας eae £3 P in Mk. xiv. περὶ αὐτοῦ” ovat δὲ TH ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνω, δι οὗ 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου αι in / 9 2 κι ο κά κ εν ig D ε mn yc: x» sense of παραδίδοται: καλὸν ἦν αὐτῷ, εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη 6 ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος.; dying. 25. ᾿Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ᾿Ιούδας ὁ παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν εἶπε, '΄Μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι, paBBi;” Λέγει αὐτῷ, “™ Xd " εἶπας." hal ver δν 26. ᾿Εσθιόντων δὲ αὐτῶν, λαβὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς tév® ἄρτον, καὶ εὐλογή- σας, ἔκλασε καὶ ἐδίδου ΄ τοῖς μαθηταῖς, καὶ “ εἶπε, ΄' Λάβετε, φάγετε: 1 εις εκαστος without αυτων in NBCLZ 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 2 την χειρα before ev τω τρυβλιω in NABLZ. 7 SBCDLZ omit τον. * For εδιδου τ. p. και ειπε SEBDLZ, cursives, have Sous τ. p. ειπεν. λυπούμενοι Seems a weak word, and the the beginning of the meal. More pro-
addition of the evangelist’s pet word σφόδρα does not make it strong. None of the accounts realistically ex- press the effect which must have been produced.—yjpéavro helps to bring out the situation: they began to inquire after some moments of mute astonish- ment.—pytt ἐγώ, etc., can it be I? expecting or hoping for a negative answer; yet not too sure: probably many of them were conscious of fear; even Peter might be, quite compatibly with his boldness a little later.—Ver. 23. ὁ ἐμβάψας, he who dipped, dips, or shall have dipped. The aorist participle de- cides nothing as to time, but merely points to a single act, as distinct from a process (cf. the present in Mk.). The expression in Mt. does not necessarily identify the man unless we render: who has just dipped, and conceive of Jésus as dipping immediately after. (So Weiss.) In favour of this view it may be said that there was no sense in refer- ring to a single act of dipping, when there would be many in the course of the meal, unless the circumstances were such as to make it indicate the individual disciple. The mere dipping in the same dish would not identify the traitur, be- cause there would be several, three or four, doing the same thing, the company being divided into perhaps three groups, each having a separate dish.—riv χεῖρα. The ancients used their hands, not knives and forks. So still in the East.— τρυβλίφ. Hesychius gives for this word ὀξοβάφιον = acetabulum, a vessel for vinegar. Hence Elsner thinks the re- ference is to a vessel full of bitter herbs steeped in vinegar, a dish partaken of at
bably the words point to a dish containing a mixture of fruit—dates, figs, etc.— vinegar and spices, in which bread was dipped, the colour of bricks or mud, to remind them of the Egyptian bondage (vide Buxtorf, Lex. Talm., p. 831). The custom of dipping here referred to is illustrated by the following from Furrer (Wanderungen, p. 133): ‘Before us stood two plates, one with strongly spiced macaroni, the other with a dish of fine cut leeks and onions. Spoons there were none. There were four of us who dipped into the same dish.”—Ver. 24. ὑπάγει, goeth, a euphemism for death. Cf. John xili, 33.--καλὸν ἦν without the ἄν, not unusual in conditional sentences of this sort: supposition contrary to fact (vide Burton, M. T., §§ 248-9).
Vv. 26-29. The Lord’s Supper (Mk. xiv. 22-25; Lk. xxii. 19, 20).—Ver. 26. ἐσθ. δὲ αὐτῶν: same phrase as in ver. 21, with δὲ added to introduce another memorable incident of the paschal supper. No details are given regarding that meal, so that we do not know how far our Lord followed the usual routine, for which consult Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., or Smith’s Dictionary, article Passover. Neither can we with certainty fix the place of the Holy Supper in the paschal meal, or in relation to the announcement of the traitor. The evangelists did not concern themselves about such subordi- nate matters.—AaPav, etc., having taken a cake of bread and given thanks He broke it. The benediction may have been an old form put to a new use, or original.—etAoyyoas has not ἄρτον for its object, which would in that case have been placed after ἰ.--δοὺς, etc., giving