used to translate Ta | bile, gall in xx. 14 of the same book it is the’ equivalent of ΓΤΥΎ) in the sense of
the gall of vipers, {.ε., the poison of vipers, which the ancients supposed to lie in the gall. In Prov. v. 4 and Lam.
ili. 15 it is the rendering of syay5,
, ~ - πικρίας καὶ σύνδεσμον ἀδικίας ὁρῶ σε ὄντα. 24. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ 6
Σίμων εἶπε, Δεήθητε ὑμεῖς ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ πρὸς τὸν Κύριον, ὅπως μηδὲν ἐπέλθῃ ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ ὧν εἰρήκατε.ὶ 25. Οἱ μὲν οὖν διαμαρτυράµενοι καὶ λαλήσαντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Κυρίου, ὑπέστρεψαν” εἰς Ἱερουσαλήμ, πολλάς τε κώμας τῶν Σαμαρειτῶν εὐηγγελίσαντο.
1 Before δεηθητε D, Gig., Syr. Harcl. mg., Const. apost. prefix παρακαλω; cf. ver. το, So Hilg. For ων D has tovrev των κακων, and adds por after ειρηκατε, so Hilg. At end of verse D adds os πολλα κλαιων ου διελιµπανεν, so Syr. H. mg. without es—so Blass in B, but και for os; Hilg. follows D; see Belser, Beitrage, p. 4, who refers to xx. 27, xvii. 13, for διαλιµπανειν, διαλειπειν, constr. with parti- ciple as here, instances which he regards as beyond doubt Lucan; cf. Luke vii. 45, where διαλειπω, used only by Luke, is found with a similar constr., διαλιµ,πανω only found elsewhere in Tobit x. 7 (but S a/.), but also in Galen, cf. Grimm, sué v., and L. and S. But in spite of the Lucan phraseology it seems difficult to suppose that Luke would himself have struck out the words, unless, indeed, he had gained further in- formation about Simon which led him to conclude that the repentance was not sincere. Such an omission could scarcely be made for the sake of brevity. Weiss, Codex D, p. 68, evidently regards the words as added by a later hand, not as omitted by Luke himself; see also Wendt, edit. 1899, p. 177, note.
Σνπεστρεψαν CEHLP, several verss., Chrys.; υπεστρεφον ABD 15, 61, Vulg., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. Zapaperrwy ABCDHLP, so W.H. (and see App., p. 161), Hilg.; Σαμαριτων ΙΝΕ, so Tisch., Blass. ενηγγελι- σαντο HLP, Boh., Syr. Pesh., Aeth., Chrys.; ενηγγελιζοντο KRABCD, Vulg., Sah.,
Syr. Harcl., Arm., Aug., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, Wendt, Hilg.
wormwood ; and in the former passage we have πικρότερον χολῆς, If we take the most usual signification of χολή in the LXX, viz., that of the gall plant (see R.V., margin, in loco, gall, or a gall root), the thought of bitterness would naturally be associated with it (in the passage which presents the closest paral- lel to the verse before us, Deut. xxix. 18, ἐν χολῇ καὶ πικρία, πικρία is a transla- tion of the Hebrew word for wormwood) ; ἐν χολῇ πικρίας might therefore denote the intefnse malignity which filled the heart o Simon. (On the word χολή in its sense here, and in Matt. xxvii. 34, see Meyer-Weiss, Maitth., p. 546.) The pre- position εἰς is generally taken as = ἐν in this passage; but Rendall suggests that here, as is sometimes elsewhere, it = ὡς, and he therefore renders: ‘‘I see that thou art as gall of bitterness,” de- noting the evil function which Simon would fulfil in the Church if he continued what he was. Westcott’s note on Heb. xii. 15 should also be consulted.—ovv- δεσµον ἁδικίας: R.V. translates “‘ thou art . . . in the bond of iniquity”. But if the passage means that Simon ‘will become . . . a bond of iniquity,” R.V., margin, or that he is now as a bond of iniquity (Rendall), the expression denotes, not that Simon is bound, but that he binds others in iniquity. Blass refers to
Isa. lviii. 6, where a similar phrase occurs, σύνδ. ἀδικ., and explains: ‘ improbitate quasi vinctus es”; so Grimm, while pointing out that the phrase in Isa. lviii. 6 is used in a different sense from here, explains ‘‘vinculum improbitatis, {.ε., quod ab improbitate nectitur ad con- stringendos animos”. Others again take the expression to denote a bundle, fasciculus (Wetstein) (cf. Hdian., iv., 12, 11), Simon being regarded ‘‘ quasi ex improbitate concretum,” cf. especially Cicero, in Pison., ix., 21; but such a ren- dering is rejected by Grimm, as no ex- amples can be adduced of this tropical use of the noun, and by Wendt, on the ground that ἀδικία is not in the plural, but in the singular. Combinations with ἀδικία are characteristic of St. Luke; cf. Luke xiii. 27, xvi. 8, 9, xviii. 6; cf. Act i. 18; the word only occurs once elsewhere in the Gospels, John vii. 18; Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, p. 23.