Vv. 11-19. The ten lepers.—Ver. 11. εἰς Ἱερ.: the note of time seems to take us back to ix. 51. No possibility of introducing historic sequence into the section of Lk. lying between ix. 51 and xvili. 15.---αὐτὸς, He without emphasis ; not He, as opposed to other pilgrims taking another route, directly through Samaria (so Meyer and (οάεί).-- διὰ µέσον = διὰ peoov (T.R.), µέσον being used adverbially as in Philip. ii. 15 = through between the two provinces.
paket ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ
αὐτὸς διήρχετο διὰ μέσου] Σαμαρείας καὶ Γαλιλαίας. 12. καὶ εἰσερχομένου αὐτοῦ εἴς τινα κώµην, ἀπήντησαν ὃ αὐτῷ ὃ δέκα λεπροὶ ἄνδρες, ot ἔστησαν " πόρρωθεν’ 13. καὶ αὐτοὶ ἦραν φΦωνήν, λέγοντες, “Ingo, ἐπιστάτα, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς. 14. Καὶ ἰδὼν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ἔεΠορευθέντες ἐπιδείξατε ἑαυτοὺς τοῖς ἱερεῦσι.” 15. ets δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν, ἰδὼν ὅτι ἰάθη,
Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ
ς > , 3 ιό
ὑπάγειν αὐτούς, ἐκαθαρίσθησαν. !
ὑπέστρεψε, μετὰ φωνῆς μεγάλης δοξάζων τὸν Θεόν: 16. καὶ ἔπεσεν
ἐπὶ πρόσωπον παρὰ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ, εὐχαριστῶν αὐτῷ καὶ αὐτὸς
ἦν Lapapeitns: 17. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, ““Οὐχὶ ὃ οἱ δέκα
593
ἐκαθαρίσθησαν; οἱ δὲ δ ἐννέα ποῦ; ς
Wavtes δοῦναι δόξαν τῷ Θεῶ, εἰ μὴ 6
,
ἀλλογενὴς οὗτος ; ”
1δ. οὐχ εὑρέθησαν ὑποστρέ- 10. Καὶ
,
4 > -~ 66? a / ς a 2 ειπεν AUT, Αναστὰς πορευου ᾽ η πιστις σου σεσωκε σε.
1 δια µεσον in ΝΒΙ, (D µεσον alone) 1, 13, 69 al. ava µεσον.
2 So in ABX al. (W.H. text). marg.).
3 BL omit avrw (W.H.).
4 BF 157 have ανεστησαν (W.H. text).
δονχ in BLS 131.
υπηντ. in NL 1, 13, 69, 131 al. (Tisch., W.H.,
6 Omit δε AD (Tisch., W.H., brackets), found in ${BLX, etc.
named, on the confines of both, which explains the mixture of Jews and Samaritans in the crowd of lepers.—Ver. 12. δέκα λεπροὶ: ten, a large number, the disease common. Rosenmiiller (das A. and N. Morgenland) cites from Dampier a similar experience; lepers begging alms from voyagers on the river Camboga, when they approached their village, crying to them from afar. They could not heal them, but they gave them a little rice.—Ver. 13. ἐπιστάτα: this word is peculiar to Lk., which suggests editorial revision of the story.—éAénoov : a very indefinite request compared with that of the leper in v. 12 f., whose remarkable words are given in identical terms by all the synoptists. The interest wanes here.—Ver. 14. ἐπιδείξατε ἕ.: the same direction as in the first leper Narrative, but without reason annexed.— ἱερεῦσι: plural, either to the priests of their respective nationalities (Kuinoel, J. Weiss, etc.) or to the priests of the respective districts to which they be- longed (Hahn).—év τῷ ὑπάγειν, etc., on the way to the priests they were healed. Did they show themselves to the priests ? That does not appear. The story is defective at this point (‘ negligently told,” Schleier.), either because the narrator did not know or because he took no interest in that aspect of the case. The priests might not be far off,
—Ver. 15. δοξάζων +. Θ.: general state- ment, exact words not known, so also in report of thanksgiving to Jesus,—Ver. 16. Lapapeirys: this, with the comment. of Jesus, the point of interest for Lk.— Ver. 17. οὐχ (οὐχὶ, T.R.): asking a question and implying an affirmative answer. Yet the fact of asking the guestion implies a certain measure of doubt, No direct information as to what happened had reached Jesus pre- sumably, and He naturally desires ex- planation of the non-appearance of all but one. Were not all the ten (ot δέκα, now a familiar number) healed, that you come back alone ὃ---ποῦ: emphatic position: the nine—where? expressing the suspicion that not lack of healing but lack of gratitude was the matter with the nine.—Ver. 18. οὐχ εὑρέθησαν, etc., best taken as another question (so R.V.). --ἀλλογενὴς, here only, in N.T.; also in Sept. = ἀλλόφυλος and ἀλλοεθνής in classics, an alien, Once more the Jew suffers by comparison with those without in respect of genuine religious feeling— faith, gratitude. It is not indeed said that all the rest were Jews. What is certain is that the one man who came back was not a Jew.—Ver. 19. ἀναστὰς πορεύου: that might be all that Jesus said (so in B), as it was the man’s gratitude, natural feeling of thankfulness, not his faith, that was in evidence. But Lk., feeling that