«8—28.
23. Καὶ ἐγένετο παραπορεύεσθαι αὐτὸν ἐν σπορίµων, καὶ ἤρξαντο οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 24. καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι ἔλεγον
τοὺς στάχυας. ἐν" τοῖς σάββασιν, ὃ οὐκ ἔξεστι ;
355
τοῖς σάββασι 1 διὰ τῶν ὁδὸν ποιεῖν ὃ τίλλοντες αὐτῷ, “"lSe, τί ποιοῦσιν
25. Καὶ αὐτὸς ἔλεγεν ὅ αὗτοῖς,
, ««Οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε, τί ἐποίησε Δαβίδ, ὅτε χρείαν ἔσχε καὶ ἐπεί-
> 9 4 ς 3 3 A νασεν GUTOS και OL µετ αυτου,
26. πῶς ὃ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οἶκον
τοῦ Θεοῦ «ἐπὶ 5᾿Αβιάθαρ τοῦ] ἀρχιερέως, καὶ τοὺς ἄρτους THS g Lk. iii. 2;
προθέσεως ἔφαγεν, οὓς οὐκ ἔδεστι Φαγεῖν εἰ μὴ τοῖς ἱερεῦσι.ὸ καὶ 27. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “TS
3. AY Lal a ar = > ἔδωκε καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτῷ ovat;
1ν. 47 Acts xi. 23.
σάββατον διὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐγένετο, obx® ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τὸ
σάββατον. σαββάτου.”
28. ὥστε κύριός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ τοῦ
1 BCD have διαπορ. (Lk.). ΝΒΟΡΙ.Δ place αυτον εν τοις σαββασι before the
verb.
2 ot pad. before ηρξαντο in $BCDL 33, 69 ai.
3 B has οδοποιειν (W.H. margin).
5 SBCL omit αυτος (most modern editions.
4 SSABCDALZ it. vulg. omit ev.
Ws. after Meyer dissents). For
ελεγεν ΜΟΙ, it. vulg. have λεγει (Tisch., W.H., Ws.).
6 BD omit πως (W.H. in brackets). 5 τους vepets in NBL,
classic Greek it means to make a road = viam sternere, ὁδὸν ποιεῖσθαι meaning to make way =iter facere. If we assume that Mk. was acquainted with and observed this distinction, then the meaning will be: the disciples began to make a path by pulling up the stalks (τέλλοντες τοὺς στάχυας), or perhaps by trampling under foot the stalks after first plucking off the ears. The ἤρξαντο in that case will mean that they began todo that when they saw the path was not clear, and wished to make it more comfortable for their Master to walk on. But it is doubtful whether in Hellenistic Greek the classic distinction was ob- served, and Judges xvii. 8 (Sept.) supplies an instance of ὁδὺν ποιεῖν = making way, ‘‘as he journeyed”. It would be natural to Mk. to use the phrase in the sense of iter facere. If we take the phrase in this sense, then we must, with Beza, find in the passage a | απαέρια verborum collocatio, and trans- ate as if it had run: ὁδὸν ποιοῦντες τίλλειν: ‘began, as they went, to pluck,” etc. (R. V.). The former view, however, is not to be summarily put aside because it ascribes to the disciples an apparently wanton proceeding. If there was a right of way by use and wont, they would be quite entitled to
7 S$BL omit του. 9 και ουχ in NBCLAZ 33 verss.
actso. The only difficulty is to under- stand how a customary path could have remained untrodden till the grain was ripe, or even in the ear. On this view vide Meyer. Assuming that the disciples made a path for their Master by pulling up the grain, with which it was over- grown, or by trampling the straw after plucking the ears, what did they do with the latter? Mt. and Lk. both say or imply that the plucking was in order to eating by hungry men. Meyer holds that Mk. knows nothing of this hunger, and that the eating of the ears came into the tradition through the allusion to David eating the shewbread. But the stress Mk. lays on need and hunger (duality of expression, ver. 25) shows that in his idea hunger was an element in the case of the disciples also.—Ver. 24. ἔλεγον αὐτῷ. In this case they speak {ο Christ against His disciples; indirectly against Him.—6 οὐκ ἔξεστιν: the offence was not trampling the grain or straw, but plucking the ears—reaping on a small scale; rubbing = threshing, in Lk.— xpelay ἔσχε καὶ ἐπείνασεν: another example of Mk.’s duality, intelligible only if hunger was the point of the story. The verbs are singular, because David (αὐτὸς) is the hero, his followers in the background. — Ver. 26. ἐπὶ