37---36.
499
, « a
µετάνοιαν. 33. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον πρὸς αὐτόν, “Atari! of μαθηταὶ [ A ε
Ἰωάννου νηστεύουσι πυκνά, καὶ δεήσεις ποιοῦνται, ὅμοίως καὶ οἱ τῶν
Ν , » apicaiwy: ot δὲ coi ἐσθίουσι καὶ πίνουσιν ;
34. Ὁ Sé? εἶπε
πρὸς αὐτούς, “Mh δύνασθε τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ νυμφῶνος, ἐν ᾧ 6 νυμφίος
per αὐτῶν ἐστι, ποιῆσαι νηστεύειν ® ;
35. ἐλεύσονται δὲ ἡμέραι,
~ ~ , καὶ ὅταν ἀπαρθῇ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν 6 vupdios, τότε νηστεύσουσιν ἐν ἐκείναις
ταῖς ἡ pépats.”
36. Ἔλεγε δὲ καὶ παραβολὴν πρὸς αὐτούς, ““On
οὐδεὶς ἐπίβλημα ἱματίου καινοῦ” ἐπιβάλλει ἐπὶ ἱμάτιον παλαιόν ’
εἰ δὲ µήγε, καὶ τὸ καινὸν σχίζειι καὶ τῷ παλαιῷ οὗ συμφωνεῖ
i Omit διατι BLE 33 cop.
2 Add Inoous RBCDLE 33.
3 yyorevorat in B= 28 (Tisch., W.H.). T.R.=SACDLA al. 4 For up. καινου RBDLE 33 al. have απο ty. κ. σχισας (Tisch., W.H.). ACA
al. omit σχισας. > σχισει in NBCDL 33.
§ cupdovyce in S$ABCDLX 33 and many other minusc.
The supposed speakers are the Pharisees and scribes (νετ. 39). In Mk. Phar. and John’s disciples. In Mt. the latter only. If the Pharisees and scribes were the spokesmen, their putting John’s dis- ciples first in stating the common practice -would be a matter of policy = John held in respect by Jesus, why then differ even from him ὃ---πυκνὰ (neuter plural, from πυκνός, dense), frequently.— δεήσεις ποιοῦνται, make prayers, on system ; added to complete the picture of an ascetic life; cf. ii. 37; referred to again in xi. 1; probably the question really concerned only fasting, hence omitted in the description of the life of the Jesus-circle even in Τ.Κ.---ἐσθίουσιν καὶ πίνονσι, eat and drink; on the days when we fast, making no distinction of days.—Ver. 34. μὴ δύνασθε... ποιῆσαι νησ., can ye make them fast? -In Mt. and Mk., can they fast? Lk.’s form of the question points to the futility of prescriptions in the circumstances. The Master could not make His dis- ciples fast even if He wished.—Ver. 35. καὶ ὅταν: Mt. and Mk. place the καὶ before τότε in the next clause. Lk.’s arrangement throws more emphasis on ἡμέραι: there will come days, and when, etc. The καὶ may be explicative ( = et guidem, Bornemann), or it may intro- duce the apodosis.—érav ἀπαρθῇ, the subjunctive with ἂν in a relative clause teferring to a probable future event.
Vv. 36-39. Relative parabolic Logia.— Έλεγε . . . ὅτι: an editorial introduction to the parabolic sayings. The first of these, as given by Lk., varies in form from the version in the parallels, suggests
somewhat different ideas, and is in itself by no means clear. Much depends on whether we omit or retain σχίσας in the first clause. If, with S8BDL, we re- tain it, the case put is: a piece cut out of a new garment to patch an old one, the evil results being: the new spoiled, and the old patched with the new piece pre- senting an incongruous appearance (ov συμφωνήσει). If, with AC, etc., we omit σχίσας, the case put may be: a new piece not cut out of a new garment, but a remnant (Hahn) used to patch an old, this new piece making a rent in the old garment; τὸ καινὸν in second clause not object of, but nominative to, σχίσει, and the contrast between the new patch and old garment presenting a grotesque appearance. The objection to this latter view is that there is no reason in the case supposed why the new patch should make a rent. In Mt. and Mk. the patch is made with unfulled cloth, which will contract. But the remnant of cloth with which a new garment is made would not be unfulled, and it would not contract. The sole evil in that case would bea piebald appearance. On the whole it seems best to retain σχίσας, and to render τὸ καινὸν σχίσει, he (the man who does so foolish a thing) will trend the new. Kypke suggests as an alternative rendering: the new is rent, taking σχίζει intransitively, of which use he cites an instance from the Testament of the twelve patriarchs. The sense on this rendering remains the same.—Ver. 37. The tradition of the second logion: seems to have come down to Lk.’s time without variation; at all events he gives