ἀποθανεῖν ἔτι δύνανται: ἰσάγγελοι γάρ εἶσι, καὶ viel εἶσι roo!
Θεοῦ, τῆς ἀναστάσεως υἱοὶ ὄντες.
37. Ὅτι δὲ ἐγείρονται οἱ νεκροί,
καὶ Μωσῆς ἐμήνυσεν ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου, ds λέγει Κύριον τὸν Θεὸν
᾽Αβραὰμ καὶ τὸν Θεὸν ἸΙσαὰκ καὶ tov! Θεὸν Ιακώβ. οὐκ ἐστι νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ ζώντων.
38. Θεὸς δὲ
πάντες γὰρ αὐτῷ [ῶσιν. 39.
᾽Αποκριθέντες δέ τινες τῶν γραμματέων εἶπον, “Διδάσκαλε, καλῶς etwas.” 49. Οὖκ ἔτι δὲ Σ ἐτόλμων ἐπερωτῶν αὐτὸν οὐδέν. 41. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, “Mas λέγουσι τὸν Χριστὸν υἱὸν Δαβὶδ
εἶναι ;
42. καὶ αὐτὸς” Δαβὶδ λέγει ἐν βίβλῳ ψαλμῶν, ΄Εἶπεν ὁ 5
Κύριος τῷ kupiw µου, Κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν µου, 43. ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς
ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου.
1 Omit του NABL. 3 overt yap in NBL 33 al.
* evar A. νιον in BL, and αυτος yap for και αυτος.
§ avrov κυριον in ABKL, etc. (W.H.).
use of this verb, even when it seems but an elegant superfluity, is common in Greek. Examples in Bornemann.—Ver. 36. ἀποθανεῖν: marriage, birth, death, go together, form one system of things, that of this world. In the next they have no place. Here Lk. expatiates as if the theme were congenial. — ἰσάγγελοι, angel-like, here only in Ν.Τ.--καὶ viot εἶσιν, etc.: sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. This connection of ideas recalls St. Paul’s statement in Rom, i. 4 that Christ was declared or constituted Son of God with power by the resurrection.—Ver. 37. καὶ M.: the same Moses who gave the Levirate law. It was important in speaking to Sadducees to show that even Moses was on the side of the resurrection.— ἐμήνυσεν, made known, used in reference to something previously hidden (John xi. 57).--ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου, as in Mk., vide notes there.—Ver. 38. θεὸς is predicate = Jehovah is not God of dead men.—8é has the force of the argumentative nonne.—wavTes yap αὐτῷ Lao, ‘for all live unto Him” (A.V., R.V.), is probably an editorial explanatory gloss to make the deep thought of Jesus clearer (notin parallels), The gloss itself needs explanation. Is ‘ all” to be taken without qualification ?—att@ may be variously rendered “ὃν Him,” 7.¢., by His power: quoad Dei potentiam (Grotius), “in Him” (Ewald), ‘‘ for Him,” z.e., for His honour (Schanz), or for “‘ His thought or judgment ” = He accounts them as living (Hahn). The
44. Δαβὶδ οὖν κύριον αὐτὸν 5
} Omit τον in second and third places NBDLR.
5 BD omit o. Τ.Ε. = ND (Tisch.).
sentiment in some measure echoes Rom. xiv. 7, 8.—Ver. 39. καλῶς εἶπας, Thou hast spoken well; complimentary, but insincere, or only half sincere. They are glad to have the Sadducees put down, but not glad that $¥esus triumphed.— Ver. 40. οὐκέτι yap: the γὰρ, if the true reading, must mean: The scribes could do nothing but flatter (ver. 39), for they were so conscious of His power that they dared no longer ask captious questions.
Vv. 41-44. The counter question (Mt. xxii, 41-46, Mk. xii. 35-37). Lk., who had given something similar at an earlier stage (x. 25-37), omits the question -of the scribe concerning the great com- mandment, which comes in at this point in Mt. (xxii. 34-40) and Mk. (xii. 28-34), retaining only its conclusion (in Mk.), which he appends to the previous narrative (ver. 40).—Ver. 41. πρὸς αὐτούς, to them, {.6., the representatives of the scribes mentioned in ver. 39. In Mt. the Pharisees are addressed, in Mk. the audience is the people, and the question is about the scribes as in- terpreters.—m@s λέγουσι, how do they say? (not λέγετε). The controversial character of the question is not made clear in Lk.—Ver. 42. ἐν βίβλῳ ψΨ., in the book of Psalms, in place of ἐν τῷ Tvevpatt τ. ay. (in the Holy Spirit, Mk.), which one might have expected Lk. to retain if he found it in his source. But he probably names the place in O.T. whence the quotation is taken for the information of his readers. That what