οὐ πολλὰς ἡμέρας. ἀνέβη εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ὁ
> ~ Ιησούς.
πωλοῦντας βόας καὶ πρόβατα καὶ περιστερὰς, καὶ τοὺς κερματιστὰς 15. καὶ ποιήσας φραγέλλιον ἐκ σχοινίων, πάντας
καθηµένους.
ἐξέβαλεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, τά τε πρόβατα καὶ τοὺς βόας.
13. Καὶ ἐγγὺς ἦν ” 14. καὶ εὗρεν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τοὺς
a 4 ss τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰουδαίων, Kair Exod. xii. 14. Chyv 1; vi. 4; xi. 55.
καὶ τῶν
κολλυβιστῶν ἐξέχεε τὸ κέρμα, καὶ τὰς τραπέζας ἀνέστρεψε"
Tell Hum and Khan Minych, will be found in the Rob Roy on the Fordan. Mr. Macgregor spent several days sound- ing along the shore, measuring distances, comparing notes, and making careful examination, and concluded in favour of Khan Minyeh. Tell Hum was thought to represent Kefr Nahum (Nahumston) ; which, when it ceased to be a town and became a heap of ruins, might have been called Tell Nahum, and hence Tell Hum. Authoritative opinion is, however, decidedly in favour of Khan Minyeh.] With Jesus there went to Capernaum ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ καὶ of ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ . . . αὐτοῦ. From the manner in which His brothers are here mentioned along with His mother the natural in- ference is that they were of the same father and probably of the same mother. At Capernaum no long stay was made, the reason being given in ver. 13, ἐγγὺς ἦν τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰονδαίων, the Passover was approaching, here called ‘‘of the Jews,” either for the sake of Gentile readers or because the Christian Easter was sometimes called πάσχα, and John wished to distinguish it.—KatavéBn .. . 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, the disciples also went, as appears from ver. 17. “επι up” because Jerusalem was the capital, and because of its height (2500 feet) above sea level. On these movements Prof. Sanday (Fourth Gospel, p. 53) makes the remark: “If it is all an artificial com- position with a dogmatic object, why should the author carry his readers thus to Capernaum—for nothing? The apparent aimlessness of this statement seems to show that it came directly from a fresh and vivid recollection and not from any floating tradition.” —Ver. 14. On reaching Jerusalem Jesus as a devout Jew visited the Temple καὶ εὗρεν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, that is, in the outer court of the Temple, the court of the Gentiles.—rots πωλοῦντας βόας καὶ πρόβατα καὶ περιστεράς, cattle and sheep and doves, the sacrificial animals. It was of course a great convenience to the worshippers to be able to procure on the spot all requisites for sacrifice. Some of them might not know what sacrifice
was required for their particular offence, and though the priest at their own home might inform them, still the officiating examiner in the Temple might reject the animal they brought as unfit; and probably would, if it was his interest to have the worshippers buying on the spot. That enormous overcharges were some- times made is shown by Edersheim, who relates that on one occasion Simeon, the grandson of Hillel, interfered and brought down the price of a pair of doves from a gold denar, 15s. 3d., to half a silver denar, or 4d. This Temple tyranny and monopoly and these exorbi- tant charges naturally tended to make the Temple worship hateful to the people; and besides, the old charm of sacrifice, the free offering by a penitent of what he knew and cherished, the animal that he valued because he had watched it from its birth, and had tested its value in the farm work—all this was abolished by this “convenient” abuse. That the abuse was habitual is shown by John Lightfoot, who quotes: ‘‘ Veniens quadam die Bava Ben Buta in atrium, vacuum pecoribus illud reperit,’’ as an extraordinary thing. It was not the presence of oxen and sheep which was offensive, for such animals must pass into the Temple with their usual accompaniments, But it was an aggravation to have these standing all day in the Temple, and to have the haggling and chaffering of a cattle market mingling with the sounds of prayer. But especially was it offensive to make the Temple service a hardship and an offence to the people of God. Not only were there those who provided sacrificial animals but also τοὺς κερματιστὰς καθη- µένους, money changers seated, at their tables, for a regular day’s business—not a mere accidental or occasional furnish- ing with change of some poor man who had hitherto not been able to procure it. ---κέρμα is a small coin, from κείρω, to cut short.—ro κέρμα used collectively in the next verse would bein Attic τὰ κέρματα. --κερματιστής is one who gives small change, a money changer (such as may be seen sitting on the open street at a table in Naples or elsewhere). In tne