(f)6s.
KOI edavpaa-av ol o^Xoi Xe'yoirer
OvfieVore c(f)dvr) OVTODS eV r&> *Ia-
par)\. fof fie ^apitratoi eXeyov
*Ev TO) ap^oi/Tt ru>v daifjiovitov CK-
MtB.
Mt xii. 22-4 Tore irpoa^ey-
K.O.V aurco 8aifjLOVi^6fjLfvov rv
Kai KG)0oV Ka\ f6epa.Tr(\)o~fv av-
TOV, u). Kat /^urrarro iravres ol
Lk XI. 14, 15 Kai rfv e'K/3aXXa)i>
daifj.6viov Ko>(f)6v' eyfvero 8e rov
daifjioviov ef\66vros eXdXrjaev 6
KQ)(f)6s. Kai ftiavfiaaav ol 0^X01*
ff dc e OLVTWV ftTrav *Ev Bee^e-
ra>
v and -acv should also be noticed ; but they have not been
printed in thick type because at the beginning of the narrative the verb is
used by A of the blind men and by B of the multitude : at the end all the
Synoptists use it of the blind man or men.
2 The bracketed words are a ' Western omission ' (WH, Introd,, p. 176).
S vr sin a j so om j ts them.
Indications of Sources
pt. ii
o^Xot Koi eXeyoi> MTJTI OVTOS evriv
6 vlos Anvet'S ; ot 8e 3?apio~aioi
(iKova-avTes clirov OVTOS OVK CK-
fld\\fi TO. 8a.ip.6vta fl p.r) ev ro>
Beff/3otV ypa/ifiareW fcai
&apio~aia)v \cyovTfs Ai&aapi(raiot KCU SaSSovKalot
OVTS 7ri]po)Ti]O'nv avrov
e< TOV ovpavov eTTidel^ai avTos.
6 8e diroKpiOcls etirei/ aurots
Lk XI. 1 6 Tpot de ireipdovTS
arrjfjif'iov e^ ovpavov fftrovv trap*
avTOV . . . V. 29 TCOV 8e o^Xcai'
Mk viii. n, 12 KOI egfi\dov 01
<&apLO-aloi Ka\ fjp^avro crvv&]Teiv
aurcS, r)TovvT(S Trap avrov (rrj-
pflov OTTO TOV ovpavov, 7Tfipdov-
res avrov. KOI dvao~Tcvdas ru
Trvevp-aTi avTOv Xc'-yet rX.
For the words of Jesus which follow in each case, see above,
No. 9, on p. 88.
Judging from the position and contexts of the two pairs of
records, it would be natural to class Mt A and Lk as Logian, Mt B
and Mk as Marcan in origin. Probably we are right in doing so,
notwithstanding the fact that as to two expressions, TrcipdfrvTfs
and -e^ ofy>aww,Lk agrees with Mt B and Mk in having them, while
1 Compare the note on doublet No. 3, p. 85.
IV
Doublets
97
Mt A is without them. Also fftrow nap' avrov in Lk only is similar
to &TOVVTCS nap avrov in Mk only. But all these three expressions
are so common, and so much in place here that, as in the case of
No. 9, no importance can be attached to the insertion of them.
And, as in No. 9 again, the words marked in thick type as
peculiar to Mt A and B are also unimportant.
The two following doublets differ from the preceding
ones, in that they bring out identities between Matthew's
records of the Baptist's ministry and that of Jesus.
No. 19.
Mt A.
Mt iii. 2 ... Kr)pv(To~Q)V ev TTJ
TTJS 'lovSaia? Xfywi/ Mera-
fjyyiKfv y&p 57 /3a(7(Xeia
Tb>f oupaco>v.
MtB.
Mt iv. 1 7 . . . rjparo 6 'Irjo-ovs
Kr)pvo-o-(iv Kai Xe'yftv Mfrai/ofirc,
rjyytKfv yAp 17 /3ao-iXet'a Tail'
Mk i. 4, Lk iii. 3 ... Krjpv
Mk i. 14, 15 ... ^X#ei/ 6 'ITJO-OVS
(is rfjv TaXiXaiav Kr)pvo~(ra>v TO
fvayye\iov TOV feov [(cat Xeywi/]
on IleTrX^ptorat 6 Kaipbs Kai
rjyyiKev rj jSatriXeia TOV 6fov'
/uerai/oetTf Kat TrtaTfixTf ev TW
Mt seems in A to be expanding, in B to be summarizing, the
corresponding passages of Mk, but in both he attributes identically
the same proclamation to the Baptist and to Jesus respectively.
Thus it appears that it is only Mt who attributes to the Baptist
the mention of the ' kingdom of heaven ' (or * of God '). Mk first
names it in i. 15, as above, but Lk not until iv. 43.
See also Mt x. 7 ; Lk x. 9, n.
No. 20.
Mt A.
Mt iii. IO nav ovv dfvdpov /LIT)
7TOLOVV KapnOV KO\OV CKKOTTTfTai
Kai els niip /SaAAerai.
HAWKINS H
Lk iii. 9 irdv ovv devdpov
noiovv Kapirbv [fcaXofJ /
Kai els niip /Sa'XXerat.
98 Indications of Sources Pt. n
MtB.
Mt vii. 19 nav 8ei>8(jov fj,i] TTOLOVV
KapTTOIS KO\OV eKKOTTTfTCU Kill (IS
nvp /SuXXerat. 1
Except the omission of the conjunction ovv in Mt B, which is
closely connected with a passage discussed as No. 3 above (p. 84),
there is no difference in these three sayings.
Compare also Mt's use of yevvfoaTa ^x^v&v in xii. 34 and xxiii. 33,
as well as in iii. 7 == Lk iii. 7.
The two remaining doublets in Matthew are not so
interesting to students of the Synoptic Problem as the
preceding twenty, because there are no parallels in Mark
or Luke with which they can be compared.
No. 21.
Mt A.
Mt ix. 13 TTOpfvOevres de /ua&re TI iarnv *E\eos 0eXa> Ka! ou Oucrtac' ov
yap r]\6ov KaXeaeu KT\.
MtB.
Mt xii. 7 ( i & eyvaKfiTe TI earif "E\eos 0\a> Kal ou Qvaiav, OVK av
KaTeStKaaarc TOVS dvairiovs.
Both these are Matthaean additions to narratives which are placed
consecutively in Mk and Lk, and which are apparently Marcan in
origin.
On the quotations from O. T. in Mt, see pp. 154 ff.
No. 22.
Mt A.
Mt xvi. 19 Kal o la.v r\crr\s eir! TTJS y^S corcu SeSejxekoz/ iv rot? oupa-
vols, Kal 6 eaf Xuarjs CTTI TTJS yr\s earat XeXujuiei'oi' iv TOLS oupai^ols.
Mt B.
Mt xviii. 1 8 dfj.r}v Xeya> vp.lv, ocra lav SYjaTjTe irl TTJS yTJs laTai SeSejxej'a
iv oupai'co Kal oaa lav XuorTjre em TTJS Vps I<7Tat XeXujJieVa iv
This promise given to Peter in A, is repeated in B to all whom
Jesus is addressing, apparently ' the disciples ' who came to Him
1 The saying seems to break the connexion here, whereas it agrees well
with its context in the Baptist's teaching.
iv
Doublets
99
in xviii. i. It occurs each time in close connexion with one or
other of the only passages in the Gospels in which the word
fKKXrjaia is found.
The resemblances between Mt v. 34 and xxiii. 22 ; x. 1 7
and xxiv. 9 a ; x. 40 and xviii. 5 ; xi. 27 a and xxviii. 1 8 ;
xxiv. 23 and 26; xxviii. 7 and lo, 1 though worth notice,
have not been regarded as sufficient to constitute doublets.
For shorter repetitions m Matthew, see pp. 168, 170.
Doublet in Mark.
Mk ix. 35 with x. 43, 44 2 : for this see Matthew No. 13,
on p. 91 above.
There is no other instance to be entered here, as it has
been decided to treat ' He that hath ears, Sec/, separately
from the doublets : see p. 106 below. And the resemblances
between Mk ix. 23 and xi. 23, and between xiii. 5, 6 and
21-3 do not come up to the standard of closeness adopted
in these lists. 3
Doublets in Luke.
No. i.
LkA.
Lk viii. 1 6 ouSels Se
Ka\V1TTl aVTOV (TKCVft f)
K\ivr]S Tidrjcnv, aXX eVt \v\vias
TiBr](nv, Iva. ot eunropeuojjiefoi
fiil/as
Mk iv. 21 fj.r)Tt fp^erai 6
Iva VTTO TOV podtov TfOfj ij virb
K\ivr)v, ov% Iva eVt TTJV
LkB.
Lk xi. 33 ouoVis \i>x v ov aij/as cis
Kpvnrrjv Ti6r](nv ov8e i^ro TOV
fjLodiov oXX* eVi TTJV Xv^viav, Iva,
ol etenropeuofAei'Oi TO <|>(us P\e-
TrwatK.
1 Treated by Prof. Lake as a doublet, Resurrection of J. C., p. 86.
2 On the complications of Mk ix. 33-42 see Enc. Bibl., ii. 1864-6.
3 The three predictions of the Passion, &c. (Mk viii. 31, ix. 31, x. 33, and
parallels; Tisch, Syn. Evang.^ 70, 73, 116), are omitted from notice,
because they are so expressly assigned to three distinct occasions.
H 2
100
Indications of Sources
Pt. ii
Mt V. 15 ov8f Kaiovviv \v\vov KOI
Ti6eao~iv avrbv virb TOV /io8ioi>
ttXX* fTTt TT)V \V\viaV, KOI \dfl1Tfl
Tracriv rois ei> rfj oiKia.
Here, as the thick type shows, the strongest similarities are the
editorial ones between A and B. To the last clause in them Mt
has a parallel in substance, but it is so adapted as to lead on to
his next sentence ovras Xa/u\|/-aVa> KT\.
As to the source of the original form of the saying, no decided
conclusion can be drawn. 1 For though Lk A and Mk are found in
the same place and connexion, they do not coincide more exactly
than the other passages do, their agreement as to K\ii>rj being
balanced by the agreement of Lk B with Mk and Mt as to podios.
But the consideration of No. 2 will lend some probability to
a Marcan origin for at least Lk A here, as the passages are con-
secutive both in Lk A and in Mk.
No. 2.
Lk A.
Lk Vlii. iy ou yap ecrrw KpvnTov
o ov (pavfpbv yevrjo-fTai, ov8e
drroKpv(pov o ov /j,f} yvo)o-6rj KO\
cis (pavepov f\6rj.
LkB.
Lk xii. 2 ovftev 8e o~vyKfKa\vfJ.-
ptvov fo-rlv o OVK aTroKa\v(p6rj-
crfrai, Ka\ Kpvnrbv o ov
Mk iv. 22 ov yap (o~riv KpirnTov eav
diroKpvfpov dXV Iva
Mt X. 26 oudei> yap e'orii>
p.fVOV O OVK U7TOKa\V(pdf)0-fTat, KOI
KpvnTOV o ov yvanrdr)O~eTai.
Here the wording is so very similar in Lk A and Mk, and in
Lk B and Mt respectively, and the difference in wording between
the two pairs is so wide, that we seem to have two versions of the
saying, the former handed down through the Marcan, the latter
through the Logian document.
1 See Bacon, Sermon on the Mount, p. 132, on the connexions in which
the saying is found.
IV
Doublets - ioi
Here as so often (see pp. 122, 131) Mk has the most harsh and
difficult form of the saying, for his purposive JW is in Lk A
replaced by a future, the tense which we find in Lk B and Mt.
There is nothing to be marked as limited to Lk A and B, as
yivwvKU) is also used in Mt.
The variation of this saying in No. IV of the New Sayings of
Jesus from Oxyrhynchus (1904) should be compared.
No. 3.
Lk viii. 1 8 with xix. 26.
For this see Mt No. 10, on p. 89 above.
LkA.
Lk iX. 3 . . . fJLT)T TTT)-
pav . . .
V. 4 Kal fls TJV av oiKiav
Kal fKfWfv f^f
V. 5 al oaoi av urj 8f-
p.fVOl OTTO Tr)S
fKfivr]s TOV KoviopTov
drro TO>V 7ro8oi>
aTTOTtmo-o-ere els
rvptov eu O.VTOVS
No, 4.
Mt X. 10 . . . ft^ 7TJ-
pav . . .
VV. II, 12 etp TJV 8' ap
TTO\IV
ea>s av e
V. 1 4 Kal os av pfj
Tai VfJids fJLTj8 aKOlHTT)
TOVS \6yovs VfJ.a>v, eep-
%6fjLevoi e^co TTJS olicias
^ TTjf TToXfWS eKClVTJS
KTlV(igaT TOV KOVlOp-
TOV T
Mk vi. 8 . . . p) TTJ/-
pav . . .
V. IO OTTOU fav flfff\
av f
V. 1 1 Kal os av TOTTOS
vp.as fJ.r)de
vu)V, fKiro-
pfVOp.fVOl fKfWfV fKTl-
vdgaTf TOV XQVV TOV
T(i)V ITodStV
fls uaprvptov av-
LkB.
Lk X. 4 . . . w irfjpav . . .
V. 5 ^ LS *l v ^ ai> e io~e\dr)T oiKiav,
V. 7 V avrrj 8f rfj oiKia
(ffOovres Kal TrivovTfS Ta nap
avratv, agios yap 6 epydrrjs TOV
fjuffOov avrov. p.
oiKias fls oiKiav.
VV. IO, II fls TJV 6' av TTO\IV ftt
6r)Tf Kal /u// Se^uma vuas, ff\-
66vTfS fls TO? TrXareias
102
Indications of Sources
pt. ii
Kal TOV Kovioprbv
KO\\r)6evTa rip.1v CK rr/s
vfjiutv (Is TOVS TroSa? aTro/za
VfUV' 7T\r)V TOVTO ytVW(TKT OTl
fjyyiKfv fj (3 fy ei> TTJ j/ avrov
TOV irciTpbs Kai To>v ayiwv
eVa>-
LkB.
Lk xii. 9 6 8c apvr^ara^vos
TI tov Tutv avdptoirav dira
av dyye\(ov TOV 6eov.
Mk Vlii. 38 off yap eav e7raii> dyiav.
Mt X. 33 oaTis 8c dpvr)V dvdpa>ir.
LkB.
Lk Xxii. 24 eyeWo 8e
KOI (ftiXovfiKin ev au-
TOIS, TO TIS ttUTWl'
No. 8. 1
Mt xviii. I 7Tpo(rri\6ov
padr)Tal
TIS (t
V ev Tfj
ovpavutv
Xe-
Mk ix. 34 irpos dXXi7-
Xovp yap
ev 717 6Sw TIS
The ro before TIS is a Lucan characteristic, see pp. 22, 47.
There is not much similarity in the sequels of the two Lucan
verses ; compare, however, ix. 48 and xxii. 26.
No. 9.
Lk A.
Lk xi. 43 ovai vplv Tols
on dyanaTf TYJV TTpoa
fv TOIS (rvvaytoyaig KOL TOVS otr-
cv Tols dyopals.
1 This is the only Lucan doublet in narrative, the other ten being in
discourse.
io 4
Indications of Sources
pt. ii
LkB
Lk xx. 46
UTTO Ttof ypauuaTeoiv
T&V 6c\6vTG)v Trcpnra-
Tfiv fv OToXaiff Kal
*v rats dyopals /cat
7rp(0TOKa6f8pias fv rats
(Tvvayotyais /cat Trpcoro-
K\Iv ypaufj.aTU)v
TO)*' 6(\OVT(jiV (V OTO-
Xats ncptnaTflv KOI dTOKaQ(dpias tv
Tals avvayatydls Ka\
irpcaTOKKicrias ev Toils
paTels Kal ol v
than to the dyandTe of Lk A.
It appears then that Mt's use of the Marcan source here is
affected and modified by the influence of that record (probably
directly or indirectly Logian) in Lk xi, to which there are so
many parallels in Mt xxiii.
No. 10.
LkA.
Lk xii. II, 12 oTav 8e t
vuds firi TO.S (rvvayayas Kal TOS
dp%as KOI ras e^oucrtay, UTJ pfpi-
TI tlirr]Tt' TO yap ayiov
TTJ
&pa a del
LkB.
Lk XXi. 14, 15 6fTc ovv
Kap8iais t/ucot/
, iya> yap
Mk xiii. 1 1 Kat OTav ayaxTiv vp.ds
S, fJ.rj irpop.epifj.vaTe TI
} dXX* e tav dodfj vulv
1 The bracketed words are omitted by a very strong group of Western
authorities (Syr sin has to be added to those given by Tisch) ; but if they are
retained in the text, the phrase irSts f) TI forms an important coincidence
between Lk A and Mt, and may point to a Logian origin for both.
Doublets
I0 5
vp.lv o-Topa KOI vocpiav y ov bvvr}- eV CKCtvr) rfj &pa TOVTO XaXetre,
(rovrat dvTKTTrjvui rj dvrenrelv ov yap ecrrf vp.fls ol XaXovi/Tfj-
anavres ol avriKfipevoi vp.lv . aXXa TO jrvcvfjia TO ayiov.
Mt X. 19, 2O orav 8e 7rapad>o-iv
vp.as, p.f} fjLfpifj.v^o'rjTe TTCO? rj n
\a\T]o-rjT' doOrjafTai yap vp.lv
cv fKfivy TII eopa n XaXiJcr/jrc'
ou yap {/pels e'are oi XaXovtres'
dXXa TO Trvcvpa TOV Trarpbs vpS)V
TO XaXoCi/ ev vplv.
The Lucan diro\oyeop.ai (Lk 2, Acts 6, Paul 2 only) connects A
and B.
The chief resemblances are between Mk and Mt, though the
passages are differently placed. In Mt it forms part of a longer
passage placed by him in the charge to the Twelve, but hardly
likely to have been spoken so early.
As Lk B and Mk are parallel in position, it is curious that Lk,
who speaks most often of the 'Holy Spirit' (p. 27), should omit
Mk's words TO nvevpa TO ayiov there : but it occurs in Lk A.
No. n.
A.
Lk xiv. 1 1 on iras 6 t
TaiTiv(t)6rjo~Tai KUI 6
B.
Lk xviii. 14 on iras 6 ty&v eavrbv
r ft \ ^
O O
Mt xxiii. I 2 oo-Tts Se v
i, KOI ooris rane iva>-
o~fi favTov
Except for the conjunctions KM and 8e, Lk A and Lk B are
identical.
They agree against Mt in having Tray 6 with a participle, while
he has oo-m with a verb. In Mt No. 2 (p. 83) the former con-
struction marked the apparently Logian pair of passages ; but
here all three are probably Logian.
io6
Indications of Sources
Ft. II
The resemblance between Lk xvii. 31 and xxi. 21 has
not been thought sufficient to constitute another Lucan
doublet, but it is worth notice. Also the narratives in
Lk v. 29, 30 and xv. i, 2 are remarkably similar. And
Lk vi. 9 may be compared with xiv. 3 (to which, however,
the parallel in Mt xii. 10 is more close) ; and viii. 21 with
xi. 28.
APPENDIX TO THE COLLECTION OF DOUBLETS
The saying, ' He that hath ears, &c'
Mt A.
Mt xi. 15 6 fx wv ^ ra
MtB.
Mt xiii. 9 6 ^v ami
MtC.
Mt Xlii. 43 6 ^a>y aira
Mk A.
Mk IV. 9 os exei o>ra
MkB.
Mk iv. 23 ei TIS e
a>ra aKove
Lk A.
Lk viii. 8 6
aira
ttKOVflV dKOVfTO).
LkB.
Lk xiv. 35 6 e\ Q)V ^
As being used 3 times by Mt, and as being merely an adjunct
to other sayings, this brief utterance was not included among the
doublets.
Each Gospel adheres to some peculiarity of form : Mt omits
uKoveiv, Mk has the verb with aKoveiv, and Lk the participle with
axoveiv, on each occasion. So it is to editors and not to sources
that these variations are apparently to be ascribed.
This was evidently a well-known proverbial phrase : it occurs in
Rev ii. 7, n, 17, 29; Hi. 6, 13, 22 6 ?x a)V ^ s aKova-dru . . . , and
Rev xiii. 9 et TIS e^ ovs d/couo-arw. With all those instances com-
pare Mt's omission of aKoveiv, and with the last of them Mk B.
iv Doublets 107
This is the most frequently repeated of the complete * sayings in
the Gospels, as it occurs 7 times. 2 The next in order of frequency
are ' Whosoever will save his life, &c.', 6 times including Jn xii.
25 (p. 87 f.) ; ' To him that hath, &c.' (p. 89), and ' Let him take up
his cross, &c.' (p. 86), each 5 times. No other saying seems to
occur oftener than 4 times.
SECTION V
THE SOURCE LARGELY USED BY MATTHEW AND LUKE,
APART FROM MARK
IN the first edition of this book (1899) tne title of the
present Section was c The Logia of Matthew as a probable
source '. Since then the scholars of England and America
have largely followed those of Germany in designating
this source as Q ( Quelle). For it has been generally
admitted that to call it ' the Logia of Matthew ' was unfairly
' question-begging ', 3 as assuming that Matthew and Luke
certainly used the document named by Papias (p. xiii).
But the abandonment of that name in favour of the neutral
symbol Q need not involve any intention of begging the
question in the other direction, by ignoring the reasons
for holding that the only two documents named by the
earliest writer who deals with sources at all are the two
which bulk so largely in our First and Third Gospels. 4
The exact or almost exact correspondence of some
parallel passages of considerable extent (p. 66) and the use
of not a few peculiar and unusual expressions (pp. 54 ff.)
in both Gospels combine to make it highly probable that
this Q was a written source. And the probability that it
1 ' There shall be weeping and gnashing, &c.,' occurring 7 times, is
excluded, as being only a portion of various sayings (p. 170).
2 In the received text 8 times, but WH Tisch R omit Mk vii. 16.
3 So Dean Armitage Robinson, Study of the Gospels, pp. 69 f.
4 I venture to refer to the Expository Times, vol. xii, pp. 72 ff. and 139.
io8
Indications of Sources
pt. ii
was used by the two Evangelists independently, and not
by either of them through the other as an intermediary
source, is not much lower, and is now very widely re-
cognized.
The only sure means of arriving at sound conclusions as
to the nature and extent of the unfortunately non-existent
Q is to collect and examine such passages l as are found in
Matthew and Luke only, and are sufficiently parallel to give
reasonable ground for supposing that they are drawn from
the same original. I give such a list here, though not with
any feeling of positiveness or even of self-consistency.
For it is rather larger than the list which was offered in
the first edition of this book, but considerably smaller than
another which I am printing elsewhere, 2 my object there
being to give every exclusively Matthaeo-Lucan parallel,
however unlikely some of them may be to have had
a common written origin. But it is only 3 by using, or
making, some such list, that we can advance beyond guess-
work as to Q.
Mt iii. 7-10
= Lk
iii. 7-9.
]
Vltv. 39, 40,
= Lk vi. 27-30,
iii. 12
=
iii. 17.
42, 44-8
32-6.
iv. 3-11
=
iv. 3-13-
vi. 9-13
= xi. 2-4.
v. i, 2, 3,
4,6 =
Vi.20,2l(?).
10
Vi. 20, 21
xii. 33^, 34-
V. II, 12
=
vi. 22, 23.
vi. 22, 23
xi. 34, 35.
* v. 18
=
xvi. 17.
vi. 24
= xvi. 13.
* v. 25, 26
=
xii. 58, 59.
vi. 25-33
= xii. 22-31.
1 The word ' passages' is used, for want of a better term, to include some
shorter sentences than we usually designate by that name.
2 In a forthcoming volume of Studies in the Synoptic Problem, edited by
Dr. Sanday (Clarendon Press). I have there worked out several points
which are passed over either entirely or with slight allusion in this
Section.
3 Perhaps an exception to this statement is supplied by Luke's collocation
of sayings in xvi. 17, 18 ( = Mt v. 18 and 32), taken together with his 'But I
say unto you which hear ' in vi. 27, when he had written nothing to suggest
the contrast involved in ' but ' (dAAd) : it does seem to be thus doubly
implied that Luke had before him, or at least knew, the comparisons
between the old and new law of life in Mt v. 17-48, though he did not
insert them in his Gospel.
v Source used by Matthew and Luke 109
Mt vii. i, 2
= Lk vi. 37,
38.
45 *Mtxi. 25-7
Lkx. 21, 22.
15
vii. 3-5
= vi. 41, 42.
*
xii. 22, 23 5
=
xi. 14.
vii. 7-1 1
= xi. 9-13
.
xii. 27, 28
=
xi. 19, 20.
* x vii. 12
= vi. 31.
xii. 30
*"*
xi. 23.
* vii. 13, 14 2
= xiii. 23, 2 4 (?).
D*
xii. 33-5
=
vi. 43-5-
vii. 21
= vi. 46.
5 D
xii. 38-42
=
xi. 16,29-32.
20
* vii. 22, 23
- xiii. 25-7
xii. 43-5
xi. 24-6.
(??).
*
xiii. 16, 17
i
x. 23, 24.
vii. 24-7
vi. 47-9.
*
xiii. 33
=
xiii. 20, 21.
viii. 5-10
= vii. 1-3, 6-9.
*
xv. 14
=
vi. 39-
* viii. ii, 12
= xiii. 28,
29.
55 D*
xvii. 20
=
xvii.6 6 (?).
!* viii. 19, 20
- ix. 57, 58.
*
xviii. 7
=
xvii. i.
=5
* viii. 21, 22
= ix. 59, 60.
*
xviii. 12-14
=
xv. 4, 5, 7.
* ix. 37, 38
= X. 2.
*
xviii. 15
xvii. 3.
* x. 7
= x. 96. ^
*
xviii. 21, 22
=
xvii. 4 (?).
* x. 8 a
= x. 9 a.
60 *
xix. 28
=
xxii. 28,30(7).
* X. 10 rt
= x. 4.
* .
xxiii. 4
=
xi. 46.
30
* x. 10 b
- x. 76.
D*
xxiii. 12
=
xiv. 1 1 (and
* X. II
= x.8(cf.7)
1 *
xviii. 14).
* X. 12, 13
= x. 5, 6.
II
*
xxiii. 13 (14
D* X. 15
= X. 12.
4) CJ
.3 o
in WH)
=
xi. 52-
* x. i6#
= x. 3 '
5
*
xxiii. 23
xi. 42.
35
* x. 24, 25 a
= vi. 40 3 (?).
6 5 *
xxiii. 25, 26
=
xi. 39, 41.
* x. 26-33
= xii. 2-9.
*
xxiii. 27
=
xi. 44 (W).
* x. 34-6
- xii. 51-
*
xxiii. 29-31
xi. 47, 48.
5
*x. 3 7
= xiv. 26 (?).
*
xxiii. 34-6
=
xi. 49-51.
i
D* x. 38
= xiv. 27 (?).
*
xxiii. 37-9
=
xiii. 34, 35-
40
* x. 40
= x. 16* (?).
7 0*
xxiv. 27
=
xvii. 24.
xi. 2,3, 4-1 1
= vii. 18
J 9>
*
xxiv. 28
=
xvii. 37.
22-8.
*
xxiv. 37-9
=
xvii. 26, 27.
* xi. 12, 13
xvi. 1 6.
*
xxiv. 40, 41
=
xvii.34,35(?).
xi. 16-19
= vii. 31-5.
74 *
xxiv. 43-5 1 a
=
xii. 39, 40,
* xi. 21-4
= x. 12-15.
42-6.
The asterisk denotes some difference of position in the
two Gospels.
1 In this case the change of position is within the limits of the same
discourse.
2 Mt vii. i6-i8 = Lk vi. 43-4 might have been expected to be the next
entry ; but the Lucan passage is so much more similar in wording (though
not in position) to Mt xii. 33-5 that it is entered opposite to those verses.
3 Compare also Jn xiii. 16 ; xv. 20.
* Compare also Jn xiii. 20. This and the preceding note help to show us
that various forms how many we know not of the same saying were
current in the Church.
5 See also Mt ix. 32, 33, [34], which is closer in language to the Lucan
parallel, though placed in a different context.
6 The remarkable expression, < faith as a grain of mustard seed,' occurs
only in these two passages, not in Mk xi. 23, Mt xxi. 21, which are
apparently of Marcan origin. See p. 89 f.
no Indications of Sources Pt. n
In the passages marked D there are complications caused
by the existence of doublets (also in Mt x. 26 = Lk xii. 2,
though not in the rest of the passage combined with them).
If Mt xvi. 2, 3 and xxi. 44 had not been omitted as
almost certainly spurious, the parallels to them would have
been Lk xii. 54-6 (?) and xx. 18 respectively.
In the above list of passages from Matthew there are
contained 188 verses and 6 parts of others; putting these
together we may reckon them as about 191 verses, or rather
more than one-sixth of the 1,068 verses of Matthew.
From Luke are drawn 179 verses and 4 parts of verses,
which similarly we may reckon together as 181 verses,
being less than one-sixth of the 1,149 verses of Luke. If
we were to include, as many would do, the partially
corresponding parables J of the Marriage of the King's Son
and the Great Supper (Mt xxii. i-io, Lk xiv. 15-24), and
of the Talents and the Pounds (Mt xxv. 14-30, Lk xix.
11-27), there would be an addition of (lo-f 17 =) 27 verses
in each case, raising the numbers in Matthew to 218 and
in Luke to 208.
But such reckoning by verses is of course rough and un-
satisfactory ; and it is better to regard the above parallels
as seventy-four separate or separable passages. Fifty-six
of these, or more than two-thirds, are more or less differ-
ently placed in the two Gospels, and are therefore marked *
in the list.
Passages which seemed at all likely to have been derived
from Mark were excluded from the list. But of course it
is quite possible, and it has been suggested in the preceding
1 It seemed to me on the whole that these partial correspondences were
not sufficient to outweigh the differences of occasion and object in these
Parables, so I have placed them in the lists of passages peculiar to Matthew
and Luke, with queries (?) attached to them in each case (pp. 3 and 15).
Harnack (Sayings of Jesus, E. T., pp. 118-26) relegates them to an
Appendix, in company with the imperfect parallel in Mt xxi. 32 and Lk vii.
29, 30.
v Source used by Matthew and Luke in
Section, that some of the sayings omitted on that ground
may have been handed down in variant forms through
Mark and Q independently of one another. If this is
thought to be fairly probable, the following passages might
be ranked as drawn from Q or Logia : Mt v. 13 = Lk xiv.
34 f. ; Mt v. 15 = Lk xi. 33 (?) ; Mt v. 32 = Lk xvi. 18 ;
Mt xxv. 29 = Lk xix. 26 ; and perhaps some others
mentioned above among the doublets, as Mt x. 39 == xvii.
33; Mt xxiii. ii = Lk xxii. 26 (?) (pp. 87, 91).
Again, in two cases some details introductory to sayings
have been excluded as due to Luke (Lk vii. 3, 4, 5, and
20, 21); but on the other hand they may have been in Q,
and their omission by Matthew may be owing to his habit
of shortening narratives (pp. 158 ff.).
For those and other reasons exactness and completeness
are by no means claimed for the above list. It contains
a speculative .element which, it is hoped, has been absent
from the previous tables in this book, and the compiler of
it has had to use his own discretion on several .points as to
which tlwe can be no certainty in the present state of our
knowledge. But, such as it is, it may be offered for use
at least tentatively and in the way of a working hypothesis.
And if it is so used it supplies the following intimations, or
at least suggestions, as to the contents of Q l :
(i) If and it is an important if the whole of Q was
homogeneous with the parts that have been preserved for
us in Matthew and Luke, it consisted almost exclusively of
sayings of Jesus, introduced, when necessary, by explana-
tions of the occasions on which they were spoken. This
description does not cover the first two passages, which
contain records of the Baptist's teaching. These, however,
may have been prefixed in order to explain and account
for the subsequent references to the Baptist in the sayings
1 The general probabilities as to Q are very clearly summed up by
Jijlicher, Introd. to N. T., E. T., pp. 354-60.
112
Indications of Sources Pt. n
of Jesus (Mt xi. 2-19, perhaps also xxi. 31 f., and
parallels). 1
(ii) Sayings belonging to the period of the Passion-
narrative do not seem to have been included in Q. The
only reference to that period in the above list is Lk xxii.
28, 30 ; and in that case the few words identical in both
Gospels seem to be better placed in Mt xix. 28.
(iii) With the one important exception of the general
arrangement of the Sermons on the Mount (Mt v-vii) and
on the Level Place (Lk vi. 20 ff.) the two compilers, or at
any rate one of them, did not regard the sayings in Q as
placed in chronological order or at least they, or he, did
not attach importance to the order in which they found
them. This appears from the fact, already mentioned, that
more than two-thirds of the passages are placed more or
less differently by Matthew and Luke.
(iv) If we agree to exclude, as above, the two pairs of
parables in Mt xxii. i-io, Lk xiv. 15-34, and in Mt xxv.
14-30 and Lk xix. 11-27 from Q, we find in it no parables
of any considerable length. We must attribute to it, how-
ever, the brief parables of the Lost Sheep and of the Leaven
(and not improbably of the Mustard Seed also), besides
many which we may call similitudes rather than parables.
The very interesting and important, but unsolved and
probably insoluble inquiry as to whether the First or the
Third Gospel is the more exact and faithful representative
to us. of Q cannot be. entered upon here. To use Well-
hausen's words, ' Die Frage, ob Q bei Matthaus oder bei
Lukas ursprunglicher erhalten sei, lasst sich nicht rund
beantworten.' 2 Harnack, who discusses the matter very
1 But there are also some reasons for thinking that these records of the
Baptist's teaching may not be drawn from Q, but may have belonged to the
original tradition generally used in our Second Gospel, though omitted from
it in this particular case. So Woods in Studia Biblica, ii. 85, 94 ; Stanton
in Enc. Brit., xxix. 41.
2 Einleitung in die drei ersten Evangelien, p. 67 ; see his following pages.
v Source used by Matthew and Luke 113
thoroughly, gives the preference to Matthew, though re-
garding most of Luke's alterations as merely stylistic. 1
The relative priority of the two great sources of the First
and Third Gospels is another moot point ; Wellhausen 2
regards Mark, Harnack 3 regards Q as the older. Sir W. M.
Ramsay 4 thinks so highly of the antiquity of Q that he
considers it likely to have been ' written while Christ was
still living '.
If, as was above shown, the source which forms the
subject of this Section supplies about one-sixth of each of
the Gospels in which it is used, it might reasonably have
been expected that words and expressions characteristic of
that source could be found and noticed, in the way that
characteristics of the Priestly Code have been observed in
the composite Hexateuch. 5 But it seems to me that such
linguistic evidence is wanting here : with the exception of
words which are required by the special subject-matter, a
renewed examination has failed to produce any expressions
which I could definitely label as characteristic of Q. 6 This
failure does not, of course, disprove the use of Q as a source;
but it does strongly support the view, which the tables on
pp. 4-8, 16-23 suggested, that both Matthew and Luke,
and especially Luke, have so ' worked over ' the sources they
employed that their Gospels frequently represent to us the
substance rather than the words of the original documents.
1 See Sprtiche und Reden Jesu, translated as The Sayings of Jesus, pp. i-
126 passim, especially 112-15.
2 Op. tit., pp. 73 ff., especially 87. 3 Op. tit., pp. 193 ff. (E. T.).
* In his Luke the Physician, &c., p. 89.
5 See Carpenter and Harford-Battersby's Hexateuch, vol. i, pp. 61 ff.,
183 ff. ; Driver's Genesis, pp. vi ff. of Introduction.
6 Harnack writes similarly as to the vocabulary (op. tit., pp. 146, 152) ;
but he finds ' a certain unity of grammatical and stylistic colouring ' in the
passages which he assigns to Q (pp. 162 f.).
PART III
FURTHER STATISTICS AND OBSERVATIONS BEARING ON
THE ORIGIN AND COMPOSITION OF EACH GOSPEL
A. ON THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK.
IT is well to take this Gospel first, as being almost
certainly the earliest in date and quite certainly the
simplest in structure.
I propose to examine the portions of Mark which are not
found in Matthew or Luke. 1 Though numerous, they are
in most cases very brief, the chief exceptions to this brevity
being the two miracles in vii. 32-7 ; viii. 22-6, and the
parable in iv. 26-9.
What gives interest and importance to these portions,
even in their minute details, is the theory, now very
generally held, that a source corresponding on the whole
with our present Gospel of St, Mark was used by the other
two Synoptists as a basis or Grundschrift^ to which they
added introductions, insertions and conclusions derived from
other sources. For English readers this view is clearly
explained and effectively supported by Mr. F. H. Woods
in Studia Biblica : 2 his arguments 3 seem to me to lead
1 In English they are brought together, in a way very convenient for
reference, in the left-hand column of The Common Tradition of the Synoptic
Gospels, by Abbott and Rushbrooke (London, 1884) ; in Greek they can be
most easily collected by taking note of the ordinary type in the first
column of Rushbrooke's Synopticon.
* Vol. ii (Oxford, 1890). The same view is well expressed and illustrated
by Julicher, Introd. to N. T., E. T., pp. 348 if.
3 The most simple and impressive of them rests on the fact that ' the
order of the whole of St. Mark, except of course what is peculiar to that
Gospel, is confirmed either by St. Matthew or St. Luke, and the greater
part of it by both' (p. 61). The different placing of a quotation in Mk i. 2
and in Mt xi. 10, Lk xi. 27 can hardly be called an exception.
pt. in. A S/. Mark's Gospel 115
irresistibly to the result which he thus expresses, ' We
conclude, therefore, that the common tradition upon which
all the three Synoptics were based is substantially our
St. Mark as far as matter, general form, and order are
concerned ' (p. 94).
But this conclusion, which may now (1909) be called
a practically certain result of modern study of the ' Synoptic
Problem ', at once suggests a further question. What is
the account to be given of the Marcan matter which neither
Matthew nor Luke has incorporated, and which therefore
lies before us as peculiar to Mark ? It might be accounted
for in two ways. Either (a) Matthew and Luke were
ignorant of it, because it was added to the Marcan source
at a time later than the date or dates at which they used
it; or (b) it was before them, but was omitted or altered
either by them when they transferred the other Marcan
matter to their Gospels, or in the course of the subsequent
use of those Gospels. In other words, did those compilers
use an Ur-Marctis (to use the brief convenient German
name for an original and probably shorter Mark which was
altered and supplemented by a later editor), or did they
use a source closely corresponding with our present Gospel
of St. Mark ?
As a contribution towards the study of this question,
I propose to bring together and classify the Marcan
peculiarities, so that we may see how far they are such
as would be likely to be omitted or altered. The stronger
such likelihood is, and the larger the number of instances
to which it extends, the greater will be the weight of
evidence against the suggestion of an Ur-Marcus. For
indeed it is only a suggestion to account for the phenomena
which we are now considering : there is no external support
for it in the words of Papias, 1 nor, I think, is there any
1 Unless, indeed, it is thought that his phrase ov H&TOI raei implies a
less orderly arrangement of materials than We find in this Gospel. But,
I 2
n6 Statistics and Observations pt. in. A
internal evidence for it in the signs of compilation which
some students believe they can detect even in this Gospel.
Of such signs the most remarkable is perhaps that on which
Wendt * has laid stress, viz. the apparent resumption in
xii. 13 of the narrative in iii. 6 about the Pharisees and
Herodians. This may imply a collection of replies made
by Jesus to questions and objections, of which Mark was
making use, and from which he broke off in iii. 6 to return
to it in xii. 13. And a good case for the arrangement of
various materials may be made as to chapter iv, and still
more as to chapter ix, 2 and again as to chapter xiii, where
Colani's suggestion of the insertion of several verses from
a presumably Jewish apocalypse has met with acceptance
in many quarters. 3 But such compilation must have been
prior to that use of Mark by Matthew and Luke which the
hypothesis before us involves. 4
In referring to the Marcan peculiarities it will be best to
begin with those which have most to do with the substance
of the narrative, and from them to pass on to those which
are mainly or entirely linguistic.
As an introduction to Section I, A and B, I quote some
remarks of Dr. A. B. Bruce on this Gospel : ' It contains
even in that case, the re-arrangement must have taken place before the
time to which our hypothesis refers.
1 See his Teaching of Jesus, E. T., i. 21.
2 See especially Schmiedel in Enc. Bibl., ii. 1864 ff.
8 See, for instance, Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, E. T., ii. 278, 358, 366,
where he summarizes what he had said more fully in the untranslated part
of his work, Lehre Jesu i. loff. ; and Charles, Eschatology (1899), pp. 323-9.
The verses generally regarded as insertions from the ' little Apocalypse '
are Mk xiii. 7, 8, 14-20, 24-7, 30, 31, and the parallels in Mt and Lk.
4 Might not Mark himself after Peter's death have been the person who
re-arranged (perhaps not always very carefully or skilfully) the groups of
reminiscences which he had taken down from the lips of Peter in earlier
years ? This would help to reconcile the impression given by Papias (see
above, p. xiii) with the express statement of Irenaeus(//a^r. iii. i) that it was
after the death of Peter and Paul that Mark ' handed down to us in writing
what Peter used to preach '. These and other patristic traditions relating
to the Second Gospel are brought together by Scott-Moncreiff, St. Mark
and the Triple Tradition, pp. 100-8.
pt. in. A 5/. Mark's Gospel 117
unmistakable internal marks of a relatively early date.
These marks are such as to suggest an eye and ear witness
as the source of many narratives, and a narrator unem-
barrassed by reverence. This feeling we know does come
into play in biographical delineations of men whose charac-
ters have become invested with sacredness, and its influence
grows with time. The high esteem in which they are held
more or less controls biographers, and begets a tendency
to leave out humble facts and tone down traits indicative
of pronounced individuality ' ( With Open Face, p. 25).
SECTION I
PASSAGES WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN OMITTED OR ALTERED
AS BEING LIABLE TO BE MISUNDERSTOOD, OR TO GIVE
OFFENCE, OR TO SUGGEST DIFFICULTIES 1
A. Passages seeming (a) to limit the power of Jesus
Christ, or (6) to be otherwise derogatory to, or
unworthy of, Him.
(a)
Mk i. 32, 34 ' They brought unto him all that were sick . . . and
he healed many that were sick', compared with Mt viii. 16 'He
. . . healed all that were sick ', and Lk iv. 40 ' He laid his hands on
every one of them and healed them '. Here Mark's description might
be thought to imply what Paley calls ' tentative miracles ; that is,
where out of a great number of trials, some succeeded '. 2 So also
in Mk iii. 10 ' many*, compared with Mt xii. 15; Lk vi. 19 'all '.
2.
Mk iv. 36 : it might be wondered how the ' other boats '
weathered the storm. (Perhaps however Mark did not mean to
imply that these also crossed the lake.)
1 Cf. Dr. Abbott's art. Gospels in Ettc. Brit., x. 802, from which several of
these instances were taken.
2 Evidences of Christianity, Part I, prop, ii, chap. i.
u8 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
3-
Mk vi. 5 'He could (cdvvaro) there do no mighty work, save, &c.',
compared with Mt xiii. 58 ' He did not many mighty works there
because of their unbelief. (Perhaps too the omission by Mt of
the sentence in Mk vii. 24 containing the words OVK rjdvvaa-drj \afalv
may be due to the desire not to suggest inability of any kind.
Compare also Mk i. 45 (/iqKc'rc SvvavOai) with Lk v. 16.)
4-
Mk vii. 32-7 : the use of spittle as a means of healing (cf. also
Jn ix. 6). And perhaps painful effort might seem to be implied in
the words ' looking up to heaven he sighed '. (Compare
avrov in Mk viii. 12, omitted in Mt xvi. 2.)
5-
Mk viii. 22-6: in this miracle also spittle is used as a means; 1
and the cure is represented as gradual. 2
6.
Mk xi. 20 : the statement that the withering of the fig-tree was
not noticed until the next morning might be dropped as obscuring
the signal character of the miracle. Cf. Mt xxi. 19 and 20
7-
Mk xv. 44, 45 a ' Pilate marvelled if he were already dead, &c.'
It might have been thought at least needless to introduce this
question into ordinary teaching.
w
i.
Mk i. 1 1 ' Thou art my beloved Son, &c.', said to Jesus : more
public honour seems to be done to Him by the proclamation con-
cerning Him, ' This is my beloved Son, &c.' in Mt iii. 17. Luke
1 These two are ' the only cases in the Synoptic Gospels in which Jesus
employs any other means than the laying on of hands ' (Gould, Comm. on
Mark, p. 149). The Apostles are said to have 'anointed with oil many that
were sick ' in Mk vi. 13 : cf. James v. 14.
2 Similarly, the cure of the lunatic boy in Mk ix. 20-7 appears more
gradual than in Mt xvii. 18 or Lk ix. 42. And see Allen, St. Matt., p. xxxiii,
on the omission of Mk i. 23-8 by Mt.
i St. Mark's Gospel 119
however follows Mark. (Compare the revelation said in John i. 33
to have been made to the Baptist at this time.)
2.
Mk i. 1 2 ' The spirit driveth him forth (eK/3aXA) ' : it is not
surprising that Matthew and Luke express this guidance by the less
forcible words avyfy and jj
3-
Mk iii. 5 ' With anger '. Matthew and Luke omit this, though the
latter (vi. 10) preserves the nept^\\^d^fvos which goes with it in Mark.
opyrj is nowhere else in the Gospels ascribed to Jesus, except in
a Western reading of Mk i. 41 (opyia-deis) : cf., however, Rev vi. 16.
4-
Mk iii. 21 * His friends . . . went out to lay hold on him, for they
said, He is beside himself (efc'ony) V
5-
Mk v. 7 ' I adjure thee by God ' : it is only in this one of the
three narratives that the unclean spirit dares to adjure Jesus (6pKio>).
6.
Mk vi. 3 ' Is not this the carpenter? ' See, however, also p. 75.
7-
Mk vi. 48 * He would have (fjdf\ev) passed by them '. There
might have been fear of this being taken to mean that He did not
wish, or intend, to help them.
8.
Mk vii. 9 ' Full well (aXo$) do ye reject the commandment of
God '. This irony is replaced in Mt xv. 3 by the graver question,
' Why do ye also transgress the commandment . . . ? '
9-
Mk x. 14 ' He was moved with indignation (^ycn/aKr^o-ev) '. Else-
where this verb always implies more or less blameworthy anger,
Mt xx. 24; xxi. 15; xxvi. 8; Mk x. 41 ; xiv. 4; Lk xiii. 14.
1 The reading in D* l^eVrarat aurous, a b d ff 2 i q exentiat (exsentiat) eos,
&c., is probably an attempt to avoid the difficulty.
120 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
10.
Mk x. 17, 1 8 ' Good Master' and ' Why callest thou me good?'
appear in Mt xix. 16, 17 as ' Master' and 'Why askest thou me
concerning that which is good ? ' But Luke follows Mark.
ii.
Mk xi. 3 ' Straightway he will send him back hither '. This
might- seem, and has seemed (see Dr. A. B. Bruce in loc., and
Speaker's Comm.}, to detract from the dignity of the request, and
from the importance of the impression made by it ; * hence perhaps
the change of it to ' straightway he (the owner) will send them ', in
Mt xxi. 3, as also in the received text even of Mark. See also p. 70.
12.
Mk xi. 13 ' For it was not the season of figs '. This may have
seemed, and has seemed to some, to imply an unjustifiable, or at
least ignorant, expectation and consequent disappointment. We
may perhaps compare edavpao-fv in Mk vi. 6, omitted in Mt xiii. 58
(but cf. Mt viii. 10 ; Lk vii. 9).
Mk xii. 32 ' Of a truth, Master, thou hast well said. &c.' : it has
been suggested that these words of the scribe may have seemed to
a later editor ' somewhat patronizing ', and may therefore have
been omitted after Mt xxii. 40 (Allen in toe.).
14.
Mk xiv. 14 'Where is my guest-chamber?' This may have
seemed a harshly expressed claim, and therefore the pov may have
been omitted from Lk xxii. 1 1 which is otherwise identical with
Mark (Matthew has no parallel clause, but cf. xxvi. 18). It has
also dropped out from the received text of Mark.
Mk xiv. 58 ' We heard him say, I will destroy this temple, &c.'
This, though only an accusation by the * false witnesses ' (cf. John
1 < It certainly weakens the miraculous impression produced by the pre-
dicted success of the demand when we learn that no more was asked for
than a loan with the promise of immediate return' (Salmon, Human Element
in the Gospels, p. 425).
i 5/. Mark's Gospel 121
ii. 19), may have appeared to be an unfulfilled prophecy, or pos-
sibly to have justified Jewish hostility, and may therefore have been
softened into ' I am able to destroy the temple of God ', Mt xxvi. 61.
(There is no parallel in Luke.)
B. Passages seeming to disparage the attainments or
character of the Apostles. 1
i.
Mk iv. 13 'Know ye not this parable ? and how shall ye know
all the parables ? ' This reference to dullness in the disciples them-
selves is found only in Mark.
2.
Mk iv. 38 ' Carest thou not that we perish?' seems more ex-
pressive of distrust than the 'Save, we perish' of Mt viii. 25, or
the ' We perish ' of Lk viii. 24. (Compare the use of ou /ze'Xet in
Lk x. 40; Jn x. 13.)
3-
Mk v. 3 1 ( . . . And sayest thou, Who touched me ? ' This ques-
tion, omitted by Matthew and Luke (but implied in Lk viii. 46), may
have been thought disrespectful from the disciples to their Master.
4-
Mk vi. 51 3, 52 'And they were sore amazed in themselves, for
they understood not 2 concerning the loaves, but their heart was
hardened '. 3 There is no parallel to this in Matthew (cf., however,
his record of the weakness of Peter's faith in xiv. 28-33). Luke
is wanting here. (To Mk vii. 18 there is a parallel in Mt xv. 16;
Luke is wanting here also.)
5-
Mk viii. 17, 1 8 'Have ye your heart hardened? 3 Having eyes,
1 Those who had come, or were coming, to regard the Twelve as 'founda-
tions' of the Church (Rev xxi. 14) would be far more likely to soften or
leave out than to strengthen or insert such passages. It has been noticed
that Luke especially ' spares the Twelve ' : see Bruce in Expositor's Greek
Test., i. 46 f., referring to Schanz. Cf. p. 197 below.
2 With Matthew's omission of ou avvT\Ka.v here, compare his insertions of
TOTC avvrJKav in xvi. 12, xvii. 13.
3 Or rather ' blinded ', which seems to be the better rendering of nupovv,
irwpctiffis. See Dean Armitage Robinson, Comm. on Eph., p. 266. As he
says, ' " hardneos" suggests a wilful obstinacy, which would scarcely be in
place in ' either of these two sayings.
122 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not?' This is omitted
in Matthew's version of the rebuke (xvi. 8-n). Luke is wanting
here.
6.
Mk ix. 38 ' We forbade him, because he followed not us ' becomes
in Lk ix. 49 ' because he followeth not with us ', which involves less
claim to personal authority on the part of the speaker (John).
Matthew omits the incident.
7-
Mk x. 35 : here the sons of Zebedee themselves make, but in
Mt xx. 20 their mother makes, the ambitious request. Luke omits
it altogether.
C. Other passages which might cause offence or difficulty.
i.
Mk ii. 23 6dov noiflv (WH mg 68o7rote>). This phrase, though
not necessarily (see Judg xvii. 8) meaning that they broke a new
path through the standing corn, might be taken to imply that they
did so. 1
2.
Mk ii. 26 ' When Abiathar was high priest '. This was probably
omitted on account of the historical difficulty : see, however, also
p. 131 on the Proper Names in this Gospel.
3-
Mk ii. 27 ' The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the
sabbath '. This may perhaps have been ' a hard saying ' for Jewish
Christians, 2 and may therefore have dropped out of use, though
here it forms a step in the argument, which is not the case with
the words substituted in Mt xii. 6, 7. In Luke there is nothing
substituted, but a break seems to be implied (vi. 5).
Mk iii. 29 '. . . But is guilty of an eternal sin ', an expression so
mysterious and so much deeper than the usual idea of punishment,
that A-aTraros has been altered into Kio-evs in the received text.
1 See Field's Notes on Transl. ofN. T. in loc. (p. 25).
2 Cf. Rom xiv. 5 f. ; Gal iv. 10 ; Col ii. i6f.
i S/. Mark's Gospel 123
And a similar account may probably be given of the omission of
the whole clause in Mt xii. 32 and Lk xii. lo. 1
Mk iv. 12 * That (iva) seeing they may see, and not perceive, &c.'
For this Mt xiii. 1 4 has the easier ' because (on) '. Luke however
follows Mark.
6.
Mk iv. 26-9 the Parable of the Seed Growing Secretly. Might
there not have been fear of this discouraging activity and watch-
fulness in missionary and pastoral work ? See End. BibL, ii. 1863.
7-
Mk viii. 31 ; ix. 31 ; x. 34 ' After three days'. In the parallel
passages Matthew (xvi. 21; xvii. 23; xx. 19) and Luke (ix. 22;
xviii. 33, there being no parallel to Mk ix. 3 1 ). substitute 'on the
third day ' ; probably because the exactness of the prophecy would
not otherwise be evident to persons unaccustomed to the Jewish
method of computation (see e. g. Gen xlii. 17, 18 ; i Ki xii. 5, 12 ;
Mt xxvii. 63, 64 : cf. Hos vi. 2). 2
8.
Mk viii. 32 ' And he spake the saying openly '. A difficult state-
ment ; for (a) if napprja-ia means plainly and unreservedly, it might
be thought strange that the resurrection should have been so unex-
pected when it occurred ; and (6) if it means that the announcement
was made to others besides ' the disciples ', this seems most unlikely
at this period, and indeed inconsistent with verse 34, which speaks
of the multitude as not being summoned until after this prediction
had been given.
9-
Mk viii. 38 ' In this adulterous and sinful generation ' might be
omitted as seeming to narrow the application of the warning
against being ' ashamed of Christ.
1 Compare the case of the obscure verse Mk ix. 49 ' For every one shall
be salted with fire ', to which the Western text makes an addition (from
Lev ii. 13) which seems to have been meant as explanatory, and which
afterwards became part of the ' Syrian ' text.
3 For other cases see Field, of. cit., p. 13.
124 Statistics and Observations Ft. in. A
10.
Mk ix. 13 * Even as it is written of him '. It is by no means clear
how the ill-treatment of the Baptist had been ' written of. Matthew
avoids the difficulty by dropping the words.
ii.
Mk ix. 15 'All the multitude, when they saw him, were greatly
amazed '. It is very difficult to see what could have been the special
cause of the amazement at this time, for any outward radiance result-
ing from the Transfiguration is most unlikely ; and the statement
is omitted by Matthew and Luke.
f
12.
Mk ix. 22 b-24 ' If thou canst do anything . . . Help thou mine
unbelief '. The fact that the father's prayer was granted, notwith-
standing these confessions of doubt, may have seemed to imply the
acceptance of a lower standard of faith than the Church usually
required ; hence perhaps the omission of this dialogue.
Mk ix. 31 ' The Son of man is delivered up '. A prophetic present:
but the /ze'AAei irapadiftoo-dai of Mt xvii. 22 and Lk ix. 44 is clearer
and more obvious. (Similarly the 6 ey/m. Matthew, Luke, and John use only aa^a in
this narrative : see Swete's note, showing that irrS^a was a word
likely to be avoided here by Christians (as indeed it is in the re-
i 5/. Mark's Gospel 125
ceived text even of Mark), because ' when employed for the dead
body of a human being it carries a tone of contempt '.
Mk xv. 25 ' It was the third hour' : for proofs that this note of
time, which Mark alone gives, has caused difficulties, see e. g.
Speaker s Comm. in loc.
SECTION II
ENLARGEMENTS OF THE NARRATIVE, WHICH ADD NOTHING
TO THE INFORMATION CONVEYED BY IT, BECAUSE
THEY ARE EXPRESSED AGAIN, OR ARE DIRECTLY
INVOLVED, IN THE CONTEXT
These, which have been well named 'context-supple-
ments ', are very numerous in Mark, especially in the earlier
chapters. They occur both in the actual narrative and in
sayings which it embodies. The nature of them may be
understood from the following two specimens :
(a) In ii. 18 a Mark alone says that 'John's disciples and
the Pharisees were fasting ' : but this fact is again
stated in the question put to Jesus in i83, which is
also recorded in substance in Mt ix. 14 ; Lk v. 33.
(b) In xv. 24 Mark alone adds to the mention of casting
lots the words ' upon them, which each should take ' :
but this is of course involved in the previous statement
of all three Synoptists that they ' parted his garments
among them, casting lots '.
I do not propose to print a list of such repetitions and
amplifications, for it would be necessary in many cases to
print with them a lengthy context, without which it could
not be seen that they add nothing to the narrative. But
instances, more or less distinct and characteristic, may be
found and examined in the following verses, numbering
more than a hundred : Mk i. 4, 7, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 28,
126 Statistics and Observations pt. in. A
34, 43* ; ii. i, 2f, 8 , 9, i5t, l6 t, i8t, 19! J "i- 8, 13. *7, * 8 ,
30, 31 ; iv. I, 2, 7, 8, 15, r6, 24, 31, 32, 37, 39 ; v. i, 15, 17,
19, 20, 21, 22, 34, 3 8 > 40, 4^ ; vi. 2, 4, 17, 39, 35. 44, 5, 53>
54, 55 ; vii. 2, 8* 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25! ; viii. if,
15, 27 ; ix. 2, 8 ; x. 27, 32, 36, 52 ; xi. 2, 4, 6, 15, 27, 28 ;
xii. 2, 14, aif, 4iti 43t 5 xiii - 2, J 9> 2O ; xiv. 4, 5, 7, 11,15,
1 6, 17, 20, 43, 45, 57, 66 ; xv. 22, 24t, 25, 34.
In the two cases marked * the whole verse may be called
a context-supplement, and so may perhaps also iii. 30 : the
mark f has been added to a few other instances, which,
with those marked *, may be considered first as the most
instructive and interesting cases.
A few of the passages here referred to are also included
among the 'duplicate expressions' on pp. 139 ft". below.
Now in a simple and original narrative, written or
dictated by, or directly derived from an eyewitness, such
repetitions and expatiations might very naturally occur :
they may indeed be due to that special determination to
' omit nothing ' which Papias attributes to Mark as the
'interpreter of Peter'. And the omission of them after-
wards, either in the compilation of a manuscript record or
in the course of oral teaching, is also natural and likely.
But what possible cause for the insertion of them by
a later editor can be assigned, except a mere wish to
extend the size of the narrative, without adding to its
substance? And surely such a wish is inconceivable
in the times and circumstances of the composition of the
Gospels. 1
1 Of course there has been no intention of denying in this Section that
there are any 'context-supplements' peculiar to Matthew and to Luke
respectively (see e. g. Mt xiv. 16; xv. 20 ; Lk vi. 8 ; viii. 27, 53) ; but they
are certainly very few in comparison with those in Mark.
m S/. Mark's Gospel 127
SECTION III
MINOR ADDITIONS TO THE NARRATIVE
I use the word * minor ' of the Marcan additions now
referred to, in order to denote this characteristic of them,
that though they add fullness to the narrative, and
though they are almost always more or less graphic and
picturesque and lifelike, they are not such as would seem
important to those who had to teach the elements of
Christianity. So far as we can judge from our earliest
records, ' the memoirs of the Apostles ' were chiefly drawn
upon for the purposes of (i) exhibiting ' Jesus of Nazareth '
as ' approved of God by mighty works and wonders and
signs' (Acts ii. 23), and (ii) of supplying accounts of His
teaching, especially on moral subjects (see e.g. Rom xii ;
James iv ; Clem. Rom. xiii ; Ep. Polycarp ii ; Didache i). 1
There would be no materials available for these purposes,
nor again for the proofs of the Messiahship of Jesus drawn
from prophecy for Jewish hearers, nor again for the
articles of the Creed which soon began to grow out of the
baptismal confession of faith, in the very great majority of
these Marcan augmentations.
The following are characteristic specimens of them :
i. 33 ' All the city was gathered together at the door*,
iii. 9 ' He spake to his disciples that a little boat should wait on
him because of the crowd, lest they should throng him '. 2
iii. 34 ' Looking round on them which sat round about him '.
iv. 35 ' When even was come '.
iv. 38 ' In the stern . . . on the cushion '.
1 And so Irenaeus says that he had heard Polycarp relate what he had
heard from eyewitnesses of the Lord trepl rwv Sum/uecuj/ avrov KCU irepl TTJJ
SiSaaKaXias. Eus., H. E., V. xx, quoting Irenaeus' Epistle to Florinus.
3 How natural that Peter should recall this precaution, and that there-
fore Mark should write it down : yet how likely that other teachers and
writers should omit it, since it appears that after all there was no recourse
to the boat on this occasion (cf. v. 13 ' he goeth up into the mountain ') !
128 Statistics and Observations Ft. in. A
viii. 14 ' They had not in the boat with them more than one loaf.
ix. 36 ' Taking him in his arms '.
x. 50 ' He, casting away his garment, sprang up '.
And others may be examined in the following verses :
i. 19, 20, 29, 41 ; ii. 15; iii. 19, 20, 23, 32; v. 3, 6, 19, 21,
27, 32; vi. 21, 23, 25, 27, 31, 33, 38, 40, 56; vii. 24, 25;
viii. n, 12, 27, 32, 33 ; ix. 3, 14, 15, 16, 26, 34, 35 ; x. i, 16,
17, 2i, 22, 23,46,49; xi. 4, 11,30; xii. 35,41,43; xiii - 3;
xiv. 3, 40, 4i, 44, 54 ; xv. 8, 31, 31, 32. 1
Here again, as in the previous Section, the consideration
of such passages seems to me to leave on the mind a very
strong impression in favour of their having been dropped
by compilers who presumably had in view the needs of
Christian teachers and learners, and against their having
been inserted by an editor of the Ur- Marcus.
But, in both classes of cases ( II and III), there may
seem to be one serious objection to this view. It appears
at first sight extremely improbable that Matthew and
Luke, even though influenced by the same motive, viz. the
adaptation of the Marcan narrative for the practical use
of teachers, should have agreed in the omission of so very
many phrases and details. But this improbability becomes
slighter when we observe that this agreement in omission
is by no means complete and uniform. Our business in
these two Sections has been to take note of words and
passages as to which Mark stands alone. But it is to be
also remembered that there are a good many cases in
which Luke retains, while Matthew omits, both the ' con-
text-supplements ' and the unimportant additional details
of the Marcan document. There are also some cases in
which Matthew retains, while Luke omits ; but these are
1 Perhaps too some statements of Mark alone to the effect that the
explanations of certain sayings, &c., were given to the Apostles subse-
quently and privately might come under this heading : see Mk iv. 10, 34 ;
vii. 17; ix. 28,33 ; x. 10.
m S/. Mark's Gospel 129
not so many, for, as will be seen (p. 158), Matthew has a
much stronger tendency than Luke to shorten narratives
and in this respect to depart from the model of Mark.
A glance in Rushbrooke's Synopticon at the passages
named in the two lists which follow, will supply some
proofs of what has just been said, and will show that there
are differences, as well as agreements, between Matthew
and Luke, which must be taken into account in forming an
estimate of what the Gospel of Mark was when they used
it as a source. Those marked * are of the nature of ' con-
text-supplements ' ; the rest are additional details, some-
times graphic and lifelike, but never religiously or morally
important. 1
LIST I.
Luke, follows Mark in retaining^ while Matthew omits:
*i. Mk i. 44 ; Lk v. 14 : ' for thy cleansing.'
*2. Mk ii. 7 ; Lk v. 21 : 'who can forgive sins, c/ (which is in-
volved in ' blasphemeth ').
3. Mk iii. 3 ; Lk vi. 8 : the man with the withered hand called
to ' stand forth '.
4. Mk iii. 5 ; Lk vi. 10 : 'he looked round about on them/
*5- Mk iv. 41 ; Lk viii. 25 :' one to another/
6. Mk v. 4 ; Lk viii. 29 : the attempts to bind the demoniac.
7. Mk v. 15 ; Lk viii. 35 : ' sitting, clothed and in his right mind/
8. Mk v. 30 ; Lk viii. 45 : ' Jesus . . . said . . . Who touched, &c/
*9. Mk x. 20 ; Lk xviii. 21 :' from my youth/
10. Mk x. 30 ; Lk xviii. 30 : 'in this time ... in the world to come/
11. Mk x. 47 ; Lk xviii. 37 : 'of Nazareth/
*i2. Mk x. 48 ; Lk xviii. 39 : ' the more a great deal/
1 3. Mk xi. 5, 6 ; Lk xix. 32-4 : ' what do ye, loosing the colt, &c.'
14. Mk xiv. 13-15; Lk xxii. 10-12 : the man with a pitcher of
water, &c.
1 Compare Nestle's interesting remarks on the evidence supplied by
textual criticism in support of his view that ' the Gospel was originally
narrated in a much more vivacious style ' than that in which most of our
present authorities present it to us (Textual Criticism of Greek N. T., E. T.,
pp. 192-6).
130 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
15. Mk xv. 21 ; Lk xxiii. 26 : 'from the country.'
To which may be added the following taken from the list
(pp. 139 if.) of 'duplicate expressions' in Mark :
* 1 6. Mk ii. 20 ; Lk v. 35 : c in that day ' (or ' those days ').
*iy. Mk iv. 39; Lk viii. 24 : ' the wind ceased.'
*i8. Mk vi. 36 ; Lk ix. 12 : 'the country round about/
LIST II.
Matthezv follows Mark in retaining , while Luke omits :
*i. Mk iii. 33 ; Mt xii. 48 : ' who is my mother, &c.'
2. Mk iv. i ; Mt xiii. i, 2 : 'by the sea side ... he entered into
a boat and sat.'
*3. Mk iv. 5 ; Mt xiii. 5 : ' where it had not much earth.' (Cf.
Lk viii. 6.)
4 Mk v. 23 ; Mt ix. 18 : 'lay thy hands on her, &c.'
*5. Mkv. 28; Mt ix. 21 : 'For she said, If I touch but, &c.'
*6. Mk vi. 35; Mt xiv. 15: the lateness of the hour twice
mentioned.
*y. Mk x. 26; Mt xix. 25: 'they were astonished exceedingly
(this is implied in their question).
8. Mk x. 27 ; Mt xix. 26 :' looking upon them.'
Before passing on from the substance to the phraseology
of Mark, two other kinds of Marcan peculiarities may be
named, the omission of which seems much more probable
than their subsequent insertion by an editor :
i. The Aramaic 1 or Hebrew phrases 'Boanerges' iii. 17 ;
'Talitha cumi ' v. 41 ; ' Corban ' vii. u ; ' Ephphatha '
vii. 34. ' Abba ' xiv. 36 is perhaps not a case in point,
as it seems to have been a ' liturgical formula ' : see
Lightfoot on Gal iv. 6; also Rom viii. 15. In xv. 22
(' Golgotha ') and xv. 34 (' Eloi &c.') there are parallels
in Matthew but not in Luke.
1 See Schurer's Hist, of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ,
E. T., II. i. 9 f. on the 'complete prevalence of Aramaic ', though ' Hebrew
still remained in use as " the sacred language ".'
in 5"/. Mark's Gospel 131
2. Some unimportant Proper Names, 1 viz. Alphaeus ii.
14; Decapolis v. 20; Bartimaeus the son of Timaeus
x. 46 ; Alexander and Rufus xv. 21 ; Salome xv. 40.
On Boanerges see above, and on Abiathar (ii. 26)
see p. 122.
SECTION IV
RUDE, HARSH, OBSCURE OR UNUSUAL WORDS OR EXPRES-
SIONS, WHICH MAY THEREFORE HAVE BEEN OMITTED
OR REPLACED BY OTHERS 2
(a) Various unusual words and constructions.
i.
Mk i. 10 (rx^o/jifvovs, a word used nowhere else in N. T. or
LXX of the opening of the heavens. In Mt Hi. 16 and Lk iii. 21
we have the more usual and suitable rp*yx6ttrns- without an accusative. In the parallel
Mt iv. 1 8 /3dAAoi/Tny u/i$i'/3X770Tpo>, to which the received text in
Mark has been assimilated : cf. Hab i. 1 7 a/^t/SaAfl TO 4p$4&ifpoy
nvroO.
3-
Mk i. 23 ev TrvevpaTt aKaGapTw, where Luke has the 'easier phrase'
(Swete) f\(i3v irvcvp.a dai/jLoviov aKciBaprov. So also in Mk v. 2, where
Matthew has &u/zor/io/uei>oi and Luke has e^on/ dac/iowa. These are
the only two places in which V nvfvfuiTi is used with reference to
evil spirits.
1 Dr. A. Wright has discussed the Proper Names in St. Mark very fully
in Some New Testament Problems, pp. 56 ff.
2 Besides E. A. Abbott in Enc. Brit., x. 802, referred to in my first
edition, see Dean A. Robinson, Study of the Gospels, p. 46, especially on
Mark's ' 190 short relative clauses ' ; and on his style generally, Jiilicher,
Introd. to N. T., E. T., pp. 324 f.; and on his Aramaisms which Matthew and
Luke may have 'pruned away', J. H. Moulton, Gram., i. 242 (quoting
Wellhausen), and Allen in Expository Times, xiii. 328 f. ; also Maclean in
Diet, of Christ and the Gospels, ii. 129 ff.
3 See Abbott's remarks, From Letter to Spirit, 642, on 'the special force
about Mark ' here.
K 2
132 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
4-
Mk i. 34 and xi. 16 rjQuv, an unusual and irregular form: see
Winer, xiv. 3 (&).
5-
Mk i. 38 Ka>po7r6\(ts : here only in N. T. and not in LXX.
6.
Mk ii. 4, 9, n, 12; vi. 55 K/wzjSarro?, 1 replaced in Matthew and
Luke by K\IVT) or K\ivi8iov, but also used John 4, Acts 2.
7-
Mk ii. 1 6 on= 'why'; also in ix. n, 28. See pp. 13 and 35.
8.
Mk ii. 2 1 2 f7ripdiTTi, a verb found nowhere else in Greek :
replaced in Matthew and Luke by
9-
Mk v. 23 ; vii. 25 Bvyarpiov : here only in N. T. and not in LXX. 3
10.
Mk V. 23 faxnro)s e'xfi. 4
11-14.
Mk vi. 27 o-7T6KouXaTO)p, a Latin word peculiar to Mark, as also is
Kfvrvpiav xv. 39, 44, 45 : see also If'orij? ' sextarius ' in vii. 4 (used
also in Jos. Ant. viii. 2. 9). The phrase in xv. 15, TO IKOVOV 7rotr}o-ai=
' satisfacere,' may also be added. But against these exclusively
Marcan Latinisms is to be set Kovo-rooSm found only in Mt xxvii.
65, 66 ; xxviii. 1 1. See Swete's Comm., p. xliii f., against laying too
great stress on the occurrence of such words.
15-17,
Mk vi. 39 o-vp-noaia o-v/moo-in, and 40 7rpat> fffTrjKOTwv : an awkward arrangement
of words, which Matthew and Luke avoid by placing their respective
adverbs (&Se and avrov) after T>V.
20.
Mk XI. 14 fJLrjKcn . . . (jir)8c\s Kapnbv (j)dyot. The USC of the
optative had become rare in the Greek of N. T. times (J. H. Moulton,
Gram., i. 179, 197). Besides which it might here seem more like
a wish for, and imprecation of, evil than the ov /u/?** e*
of Mt xxi. 1 9, which has more of a future sense.
21.
Mk xi. 19 orav tye eyevero. On the indicative after oraj/, see pp. 13
and 35.
22.
Mk xii. 4 cKf^oXiWoy or eVcf(paAaiWai>. Of these forms the first
is not found elsewhere, and the second has a different meaning.
See Wright's note, St. Luke, p. 171.
23-
Mk xiii. 1 1 [ii] TTpo/iept/ui/arf, a verb not found elsewhere in N. T.,
LXX, or Classical writers : instead of it we find M /xept/^a^re in
Mt x. 19, Lk xii. 1 1, and M irpo^crav in Lk xxi. 14.
24.
Mk xiii. 1 6 6 els TOV dypov. Though this is explicable (Swete in
loc.] Blass, Gram., p. 122), the preposition ya$ Sapijo-fo-fle and Matthew's
cv rais v in Mt xxvi. 71, and Luke has no parallel.
33-
Mk xiv. 7 2 7npa\a>v i a strange and obscure word as used here. 2
Besides the very unusual words which form the greater
1 Another expression condemned by Phrynichus : see Tiber's Lex., s.v.
He also condemns pa-nia^a used in verse 65 (see Abbott, Corrections of Mark,
492).
2 See Field's Notes on Transl. of N. T. in he.
iv S/. Mark's Gospel 135
part of the preceding list, it will be seen in the Appendix
on 'The Synoptists and the Septuagint' (p. 198) that the
list of words peculiar to Mark is on the whole much less
accordant with the LXX than the list of words peculiar to
Matthew and Luke, the latter being the most accordant of
the three. But the LXX may be taken as representing to
us the standard of ordinary Hellenistic (or Koiz^rj) Greek, as
applied to religious subjects. It thus appears that there was
a certain unusualness in Mark's vocabulary which would
render it probable a priori that those who used his memoirs
would, intentionally or unconsciously or both, modify the
language of them by substituting more familiar or more
conventionally sacred expressions.
The relative numbers of Classical and non-Classical
words in the Synoptic Gospels, as shown in the same
Appendix (p. 207), also point, though less decidedly, to
unusualness as a characteristic of the language of Mark.
() Instances of anacoluthon, or broken or incomplete
construction, in Mark, which are altered or avoided in
Matthew or Luke or both.
These are placed together in this sub-section for comparison with
one another, as being particularly characteristic of Mark.
i.
Mkiii. 1 6 f. eVoi^o-ei; rovs oi>8eKa (*at enedrjKfp ovopa ra> Si'/uaw) Uerpov,
2.
Mk IV. 31 f. 0)9 KOKKO) ... 09 OTdV (TTTilpfj . . . fJLlKpOT(pOV OV TSOVTtoV . . .
3-
Mk v. 23 Xt'ycov 6Yi . . . o-\aTs e^ft, Iva (\6&v firtOfjs. The sen-
tence is altered in the Western text of Mark, as well as in Matthew
and Luke.
4-
Mk vi. 8 f . Iva p.r)8ev cupoxrii' . . . , dXXa i
136 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
5-
Mk xi. 32 aXXa t*rra>[JiCi> . . . e0o/3oCwro TOV o^Xoz/.
6.
Mk xii. 19 MwiJffjjs fypafycv r,fuv on cav TIVCS . . . Iva
7-
Mk xii. 3840 . . . T&v BfKovTtov fv oroXaty irfpuraTflv Koi a
*rX., of KciTfaOovTes ras oltdas. . . . No doubt 0f\6i>ra>v might govern
the noun aairao-povs (as in Lk v. 39; 2 Cor xi. 12) as well as the
verb TT(pnraT(li>, but the sentence has thus a rather strange sound
which Luke's insertion of t\ovvTo>v removes. But oi KareaQovTes
following the genitive T>V &X. is certainly an anacoluthon, which
Luke avoids by the relative pronoun and verb o?
Mk Xlii. 14 /38e'Xvy/Lta TTJS fpr)na>o-a>s eon^Kora (Mt xxiv. 15 eords) :
apparently a consiructio ad sensum, with which may be compared
Mk ix. 20 tdo>i> avrbv TO nvevpa. (The same thought as in 2 Thes
ii. 3 ff. may have been in the writer's mind.)
9-
Mk xiv. 49 XX' Iva 7r\r]pa>6>ai ) where Matthew supplies
the ellipsis by prefixing TOVTO de 6Xoi/ ycyow instead of uXXa.
With these may be placed three other instances of imperfect con-
struction, which do not amount to anacoluthon, but which also
disappear in Matthew and Luke:
10.
Mk iii. 8 : the repetition of irAi/do? TroXy after TroXv ir\q6os in
verse 7.
ii.
Mk IV. 8 fly TpiaKOVTa Koi ev ef)Kovra Kai ev cKaTov : SO WH, but the
reading is very doubtful.
12.
Mk vii. 19 KaOaptfav Trdvra TO. /3po>/iara, wheVe the nearest verb to
which the participle can be attached is Xeyet at the beginning of
verse 18.
iv S/. Mark's Gospel 137
13-
Mk x. 29, 30 ovSei'f eo-Tti/ os d(f>fjKev . . . tav /iq Xa/Sfl, where Luke has
in the second clause os oi>xi M Aa/3?/ (xviii. 30), and Matthew alters
the saying to nas oo-m OX^MV . . . Xfj^erai.
There are also in Mk iv. 26 ; vii. 2-5 ; xiii. 34 three
broken constructions more or less characteristic of Mark, but
there happen to be no parallel passages in which we can see
how Matthew or Luke dealt with them (with the last of
them, however, cf. Mt xxv. 14).
(c) Cases of 'asyndeton', or want of connexion.
As the word 'harsh' was used in the heading of this
section, attention may here be called to an abruptness of
construction, which may well be called harsh, in the reports
pf certain sayings in Mark, as contrasted with the reports
in Matthew and Luke. This arises from his use of ' asyn-
deton ', i. e. from the absence of conjunctions or other con-
necting words. An examination of the chief instances l of
this difference will, I think, make it appear highly probable
that the smoother and more connected forms of the sentences
in Matthew and Luke were altered from the more rough
and crude forms in Mark, and not vice versa. Compare
Mk i. 27 with Lk iv. 36 6Vt ; Mk ii. 21 with Mt ix. 16 8c,
and cf. also Lk v. 36 ; Mk iii. 35 with Mt xii. 50 ydp ;
Mk v. 39 with Mt ix. 24 and Lk viii. 52 yap; Mk viii. 15
with Mt xvi. 6 *ai; Mk x. 14 with Mt xix. 14 and Lk
xviii. 16 /cat; Mk x. 25 with Lk xviii. 25' yap, and cf. also
Mt xix. 24; Mk xii. 9 with Mt xxi. 40 and Lk xx. i$b
ovv ; Mk xii, 17 with Mt xxii. 21 ovv and Lk xx. 25 roivvv ;
Mk xii. 20 with Mt xxii. 25 8e and Lk xx. 29 ovv, Mk
xii. 23 with Mt xxii. 28 and Lk xx. 33 ovv ; Mk
xii. 27 with Lk xx. 38 8e 2 ; Mk xii. 36 with Lk xx. 42
yap ; Mk xii 37 with Mt xxii. 45 and Lk xx. 44 ovv ;
Mk xiii. 6 with Mt xxiv. 5 and Lk xxi. 8 yap ; Mk xiii. 7
1 I owed some of them to Mr. (now Archdeacon) Allen.
2 Here Matthew agrees with Mark, so the contrast is only with Luke.
138 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
with Mt xxiv. 6 and Lk xxi. 9 yap ; Mk xiii. 8 b with Mt
xxiv. 7 Ktti, KCU and Lk xxi. n re, /cat, /cat ; Mk xiii 8 c l
with Mt xxiv. 8 8e; Mk xiii. 9 with Mt x. 17 yap ; Mk
xiii. 34 with Mt xxv. 14 yap ; Mk xiv. 6 with Mt xxvi. 10
yap; Mk xvi. 6 with Mt xxviii. 6 yap [and Lk xxiv. 6 aAAa]. 2
Mk xiv. 8 and 41 are perhaps also worth considering
with their parallels ; and Mk iv. 28 and xiii. 33, to which
there are no parallels, but which illustrate this feature
of the Marcan style.
Only those cases of asyndeton which occur in the sayings
of Jesus or of others have been referred to. For although
Mark has several similar cases in his narrative (see viii. 19,
29^ ; ix. 24, 38 ; x. 27, 28, 29 ; xii. 24, 29, 32 (?) ; xiv. $b, 19),
they cannot be treated as characteristic of him, since they
are largely outnumbered by the cases in which Matthew,
by a usage almost confined to himself and the Fourth
Evangelist, begins a sentence of his narrative with the
historic present Ae'yei or \tyovcnv, and without the employ-
ment of any conjunction (see Mt viii. 7 ; ix. 28 b\ xiii. 51 ;
xvi. 15 ; xvii. 25 ; xviii. 22 ; xix. 7, 8, 10, 18, 20 ; xx. 21,
22 , 23, 33 ; xxi. 31 bis, 41, 42; xxii. 21, 42, 43; xxvi -
35, 64 ; xxvii. 22 bis ; also, in a parable, xx. 7 bis)? But
numerous though these instances of asyndeton in narrative
are, they do not convey the impression of abruptness which
is given by Mark in discourses.
In Luke the decidedly asyndetic constructions are very
few; see, however, xiv. 27; xvii. 32, 33; xxi. 13 in dis-
courses ; vii. 42 ; xix. 22 in parables ; vii. 43 in the narrative.
1 Tisch places in verse 9 the words ap\r) wSivcuv ravra which are here
referred to.
2 Against these is to be set Mt xx. 26 without a conjunction, while Mk x
43 and Lk xxii. 26 have St.
3 Similarly 4'>7 is used without a conjunction in Mt iv. 7; xix. 21 (WH
; xxvi. 34 ; xxvii. 65 (?) ; also in a parable xxv. 21, 23.
S/. Mark's Gospel
SECTION V
DUPLICATE EXPRESSIONS IN MARK, OF WHICH ONE OR
BOTH OF THE OTHER SYNOPTISTS USE ONE PART,
OR ITS EQUIVALENT
MARK.
32 o\
6 fj\tos
i. 42 (iirr)\6cv mr' ai/rov
rj XeVpa Kai e/ca^e-
picrdr)
*ii. 2O rore vrjcrrevcrov-
Xe-yiioi/a
V. 19 fts rov otKoi/
V. 19 oo-a o Kvptos (roi
TreTToirjKfv Kai r]\tr)(Tov(nv
x. 3
ii. 26 TTCO? OUV (TTa0Tj-
T) j3p.as
ix. 12 fty TO? KVK\(O KO>-
dypovs Kal K6vs flffiropevo-
xxi. 2 et-^uff
xix. 30 elo-TTopevouevot
(JLCVOl
xii. 14 f^(o~Ttv dovvai
xxii. 17 fco~Tiv dovvai
XX. 22 ej~TTi.v fads Kai-
Krjvo~ov Kaiaapi ?; oi/y
Krjvffov KaiVapi ^ ovy
o-api 6pov dovvai fj
Sw/tev 17 /i^ d&uevj' *
ov;
xii. 44 TrdWa oo-a flx (v
[Wanting here]
xxi. 4 Trdvra TOV ftiov ov
. . . oXoy TOV ftiov
fo>
txiii. 28 aTraXos- ycvrjToi
xxiv. 32 yevrjrai dnaXbs
xxi. 30 7rpo/3aXa>o-M'
Kal K(pvr} Ta (pv\\a
Kal TO. (pv\\a K(pvr]
txiii. 29 eyyvs eo~Tiv Vt
xxiv. 33 eyyvs C'O-TIV eVi
xxi. 31 fyyvs eo~Tiv
ftpaw
Ovpais
*xiv. I TO Ilao-^a Kal TO
xxvi. 2 TO nuo"^a
xxii. I T) eopTi) T&V at>-
u.(av ft \eyou.(vr) Uda va
1 See also the preceding verse.
2 If with Tisch we were to retain in Mk xii. 23 orav dvaffrwffiv after \v
TJ7 dvacrrdaei, it would supply the next case : but see WH, Notes, p. 26.
3 D a omit /col rd a^v^a : see Allen on Mt xxvi. 2.
v
. Mark's Gospel
141
MARK.
MATTHEW.
LUKE.
XIV. 6 acpere ai'Trjv' TI
XXVi. IO Tl K07TOVS TTdpe-
[Luke wanting. But
avrfj KOTTOVS Trapeze/
XCTC TTJ yvvaiKi;
cf. Jn xii. 7 a(pfs
avTrjv]
xiv. 1 5 effTpwfj.evov eroi-
[Wanting here]
xxii. 12 cVTpo)/ueVoi/
/zov
xiv. 30 o-rjfJLepov TavTTj rfj
xxvi. 34 fv ravTi] TTJ
xxii. 34 o~Tjfj.epov
VVKTL
VVKTl
xiv. 43 ' *v@vs f TI avrov
xxvi. 47 CTI avTov \a-
xxii. 47 6Tt avToO Xa-
\a\ovvTos
\OVVTOS
XoGfTOP
xiv. 6 1 eVia>7ra Kai OVK
xxvi. 63 eVia)7ra
[Wanting here]
d.Tr(KpivaTo ovdev
xiv. 68 OI/TC oida oCVe
xxvi. 70 ou/c oida TI X'-
xxii. 57 owe oida auToV
xv. 21 jrapayovra . . .
... .
xxiii. 26 fpxopevov OTT'
fp)(6fjLvov an* dypov
aypoO
? xvi. 2 Xiai> Trpwi . . .
xxviii. I rji nt(pa)-
xxiv. I opdpov (3aQ(a>s
dvardXavTOs TOV nAiov
a-Kovo-ri fi? ...
* In these cases Luke also has two phrases, so the contrast is only
between Mark and Matthew.
t In these cases Matthew also has two phrases, so the contrast is
only between Mark and Luke.
The following places, with their parallels, are also worth
notice, though in these cases it may be said that something
is added by each part of Mark's duplicate expression, so
that one part does not merely repeat the other: Mk i.
15 ; iii. 5, 29 ; vi. 30 ; viii. u ; ix. 12, 35 ; x. 16, 46 ; xiv.
7, 44 ; xv. 32, 42.
And the following passages supply some other instances
of Mark's pleonastic way of writing 2 : Mk i. 28, 35, 38, 45 ;
iv. 2, 8 ; v. 5, 26 ; vi. 25 ; vii. 33 ; viii. 28 ; xv. 26. 3
It may perhaps be mentioned as a sign of Mark's
1 Perhaps, however, the iSov in Matthew and Mark may be taken as an
equivalent to (vOvs, which (or eufoW) is the LXX rendering of .r r in three
out of the five cases in which the Hebrew can be compared.
a It is only meant that this pleonastic way of writing is especially and
predominantly Marcan, not that it is exclusively so : see Lk v. 26; ix. 45 ;
xi. 36 ; xviii. 34 ; and especially viii. 25, where Luke has the duplicate ex-
pression as compared with Mk iv. 41 ; Mt viii. 27.
3 'EK iraiSioOfv (Mk ix. 21 only) and drro natcpoOev (p. 12) may be here
noted as grammatically pleonastic expressions.
142 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
fondness for 'duality' that he uses the double negative
much more frequently than the other Synoptists, the
numbers in the historical books being Mt 3, Mk 17, Lk 8,
Acts 5, Jn 17. But no great stress can be laid on the use
of a construction so common in Greek generally. (For
ovKfTi with another negative, see above, p. 13.) Perhaps too
Mark's fondness for the use of a compound verb followed
by the same preposition * may come under this heading.
This section has an important bearing on a point which
was much discussed before the priority of Mark to
Matthew and Luke had obtained its present general
acceptance. It used to be thought that in such passages
as i. 32, 42 ; xiv. 30 (see above) Mark had put together
phrases from Matthew and Luke. But after looking
through all these instances of Mark's habitual manner
of duplicate expression, it will appear far more probable 2
that he had here used two phrases in his customary way,
and that in these cases Matthew happened to adopt one
of them and Luke the other, whereas in some other cases,
e.g. Mk ii. 25 ; xiv. 43 (see above), they both happened to
adopt the same one. 3
1 For instances of this see Allen's Sf. Matthew, pp. xxv f.
2 So Plummer, Intern. Crit. Comm. on Lk iv. 40, agreeing with E. A. Abbott.
3 How natural and obvious a course it would be for any writer to choose
one or other of Mark's similar phrases, instead of retaining both of them,
is illustrated by an interesting fact to which Prof. K. Lake called my attention,
when the above list of parallels was first published. It appears that in at
least six of the places there referred to the Sinaitic-Syriac text of Mark
gives only one part of his duplicate expression, viz. in Mk i. 32, 42; vi. 36 ;
vii. 21 ; x. 30 ; xiv. 43. See also xii. 14 (in xii. 44 the Syr sin text seems to
be imperfect). Cf. Lake's Text of the N. T., p. 38.
vi S/. Mark's Gospel 143
SECTION VI
THE HISTORIC PRESENT IN MARK
It will be seen in the following lists that the 'historic
present' is very frequent in Mark's narrative, compara-
tively rare in Matthew's, and extremely rare in Luke's. This
usage accounts for the numerous occurrences in Mark of
Xey ct instead of a7rei> (since enreuj has no present in use),
which constitute a large proportion of the cases in which
Matthew and Luke agree against Mark. 1
Now if (as we see was probably the case in other
matters) Matthew and Luke made this change of phraseo-
logy from Mark, they were only preferring a more usual to
a less usual mode of expression. For it appears from the
LXX that the employment of the historic present had been
up to this time by no means common with the writers of
sacred story in the Koivij or Hellenistic Greek ; if, for
instance, we take the verbs which Mark most frequently uses
in this way, viz. Ae'yet, Aeyouo-i^, and epxcrai, ep\ovrai t it will
be found that they are thus used in this one short Gospel
considerably more often than in the whole of the historical
books of the Old Testament. And, if we take all verbs
into account, we find that Mark is nearly approached in this
usage by only one of the various translators whose hands
can be traced in the LXX namely the renderer of
i Kingdoms (=i Samuel) into Greek. 2
In John the historic present is found 162 times (besides
two cases preserved by Tisch in xi. 29). But when we
remember the respective lengths of the two Gospels (Mark
occupying about 41 and John about 53 pages in WH's Greek
Test.), it appears that Mark uses it more freely than John.
This however would be mainly accounted for by his propor-
1 See Appendix B to Part III, p. 208.
2 On the use of the Historic Present in LXX, see Additional Note, p. 213.
144
Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
tion of narrative to discourse being so much higher than
John's : there are comparatively few cases in Jn v-x and
xiv-xvii, and none at all in chapters ix, x, xv, xvii. 1
The usage is frequent in Josephus. And Dr. J. H.
Moulton says that it is common in the papyri. 2
In several cases the historic present gives to this Gospel
something of the vividness produced in the parallel places
of Matthew and Luke by the use of i8ov, which is never
employed by Mark (or by John) in narrative ', but by Matthew
33 times and by Luke 16 times.
List of 151 Historic Presents in MARK.
Mark.
\. 12 ciejSaXXct
21
30
37
38
Parallel word (if any}
in Matthew.
Parallel word (if any)
in Luke.
I avfatirj
iv. I J/yero
...
31 xar^X^ei
...
38 TjptoTrjcra
T
43 ftTrev
. 2 (OU . . . 7TpO(reA-
V. 12 eytvero
6a>v
I8ov
3 Xeyo>i>
13 Xe'ycoj/
4 Xe'yfi*
14 Trap^yyti
2 i8oi> 7rpo
22 ftjTfV
6 Xf'yfi*
24 ?!/
9 Xe'yei*
27 flTTfV
IO e'yeVfro
...
12 flTrei/
31 e?7Tfi/
14 7rpoyj7
[47 &,]
2O aTrrjyyeXf/
33 Xe'yei
48 eiTrei/
...
34 Xe'yei
49 eiTrej/
T
21 flTTtV
iv. I 0-urayerac
xiii. 2 (ruvt)\0r)(rav
4 o-wioVroy
13 Xe'yei
...
...
35 ^*y et
Viii. I 8 Kf\CV(TfV
22 eiTrev
37 yiVerai
24 e'yeVero
23 Kare^rj
38 fycipovo~iv
25 fjycipav
24 ftifjyc'pav
\cyovo-iv
,, Xe'yoj/rey
,, Xe'yowes
V. 7 Kpdt-as . . . Xe'yei
29 eVpa^af Xc'yov-
28 dvaKpdas . . .
rey
f
9 Xeyei
...
30 crircv
15 epxovrai
34 e'??X0ej/
35 ^X0ai
19 Xe'yei
.'.'.'
38 Xeycoj/
22 epx^rai . . . Kai
ix. 1 8 iSov . . . 7rpov
41 idoi) ?i\6fv
,, Trarrei
rrpoffeKvvfi
iTftratv
23 TrapaKaXeZ
...
TrnpfKaXei
35 epxovTai
49 epx Tal ^
36 Xe'yei
50 aTTfKpiQr)
38 epyofTdi
23 e'X^coi/
51 e'X^i/
,, peopet
t'dcoj/
...
39 Xe'yei
eXey'V
52 e&rey
4 07rapaX / z/3am
...
5 1 OUK d . . .
eiaTropeverru
25 eicreX$coi>
,.r*
41 Xe'yei
...
54 ($a)vr)(rfV Xe'ytor
vi. I ep^erai
xiii. 54 e'X^eoi/ ? iv.
1 6 ^X^ev
,, duoXovdoi (riv
...
...
7 Trpoo-KaXelrni
x. I Trpoff/caXetra- ix.
I auwcaXeo-d/Liei o?
30 o-vvdyovrai
IO VTToa-TptyavTfS
31 Xe'yei
...
...
37 Xeyoucrti'
xiv. 1 7 Xe'yov *
13 eiVai/
38 Xe'yei
...
...
HAWKINS
L
146
Statistics and Observations PUIII.A
Parallel word (if any) Parallel word (if any)
Mark.
in Matthew. in Luke.
vi.
38 \eyovo~iv
...
45 aTroXvei (?)
xiv. 22 diroXvo-fl
48 epxerai
25 rj\6ev
VO
50 Xe'yei
27 eXaX^crev . . . Xeycov ...
.
vii.
I crvvayovrai
XV. I 7TpO(Tep^OI/Tat*
'I
5 eVepwTwo-iv
\cyovTfS
i
1 8 Xe'yei
l6 eirrei/
..-
28 Xe'yei
27 ei7rei>
^
32 (pepovo-iv
? 30 TrpoatjKQov ...
s
e^oj/rey
,. o
irapiiKaXovo-iv
...
34 Xe'yei
...
I
viii.
I Xeyei
32er7rey
1
6 yrapnyye'XXei
35 Trapayysi'Xas
12 Xe'yei
xvi. 2 eiTrei/
17 Xe'yei
8 eltrev
bfl
19 Xeyoi>(rii>
...
en
2O Xeyouo-ii>
...
|
22 epxovrai
... ...
^
,, (pepov&iv
...
^
TrapaKaXouo-ii/
...
29 Xe'yei
l6 ei?rej/ ix. 2O elirev
5.
33 Xe'yei
23 eiTrep
ix.
2 TrapaXapfidvd
xvii. I TrapaXa/AjSarei * 28 7rapaXa/3a>p
ai/a\6ov . . xxi.
2O
21 Xe'yovres 1
xxvi. 1 7 7rpo(rri\dov . . . xxii.
XeyovTfs
5 Xeyowcoi;
9 finav
13 aTTOOTe'XXei
. . .
8 aTreVreiXj
Xe'yei
1 8 eiW
IO ewrej;
17 epxerai
2O az/e'^eiTO
14 dvTT?
34 e?7T/
32 epxovrai
36 ep^erai *
40 yevd/iei'oy
,, Xe'yfi
Xeyei *
eiVey
33 7rapaXjuai/ei
37 TrapaXajScov
...
34 Xeyei
38 Xe'yei *
...
37 epxerai
40 fpxcrai *
45 eX^wi/
cvpio-Kei
Vpi(TK(l *
t"
Xe'yei
Xe'yei*
46 eiVf
41 ep^erai
45 e'pxerai *
...
Xe'yei
Xe'yei *
...
43 Trapayivcrai
47 Wow . . . i
fX- 47 i8ow . .
0V
yiaev
45 Xe'yei
49 ewrei/
...
51 Kparovo-iv
...
...
53 a-vvepxovTai
57 O'vvr)x@ 1 l (j ' av
...
6 1 Xe'yei
63 fiTrev
66 \eyovTfs
63 Xe'yei
65 Xeycoi/
71 eiVai;
66 ep^erai
69 7rpoa-fi\0fv
...
67 Xe'yei
Xeyou(ra
56 17T(V
XV. 2 Xe'yei
xxvii. II e^iy
xxiii. 3 e^)?;
1 6 o-uj/KaXoCoii/
27 avi/^yayov
...
L 2
148
Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
Mark.
xv. 1 7 fvdidvi/
26 dirfjyayov
33
34
32
XVI. 2 epxovrai XXVlll. I f)\vtt> XXIV. I
4 0fa>pov 5 clirav
* In these 21 cases only does Matthew agree with Mark in using
the historic present (no less than 9 of them occur in Mk xiv. 27-41 ;
Mt xxvi. 31-45).
t This is the only case in which Luke agrees with Mark in using
the historic present.
Mark does not ever use the historic present in Parables.
List of 78 Historic Presents in MATTHEW. 1
ii. 13 (pmVerai (?)
ix. 6 Xt'yei*
xvii. I d/>a$e'pei*
19 (paiVerai
9 Xe'yei*
2O Xeyei
iii. I yrapayiVerot
14 Trpoo-epxovTai*
25 Xe'yei
13 Trapayiverai
28 Xe'yei
xviii. 22 Xe'yei
15 d(pirja'LV
Xe'yoixru/
xix. 7 Xeyovo-iy
iv. 5 7rapaXup./3at/ei
37 Xe'yei
8 Xe'yei
6 Xeyei
xii. 13 Xe'yei*
IO Xeyoucrti/
8 7rapaXap./3ai/ei
xiii. 51 Xe'yovtriy
1 8 Xeyei (? (prjcriv)
,, deiKMO-iv
xiv. 8 (prjffiv
2O Xeyei
1 Xe'yei
1 7 Xe'yovo'ii' *
XX. 21 Xe'yei (?)
1 1 d(pirj(TiV
31 Xe'yei
22 Xe'you0-ii>
ig Xe'yei
XV. I TTpoo-epxovTtn*
23 Xe'yei
viii. 4 Xe'yei*
12 \eyovffiv
33 \eyovo-tv
7 Xeyei
33 Xeyovffiv
xxi. 13 Xe'yei
2O Xe'yei
34 Xe'yei
1 6 Xeyei
22 Xeyet
xvi. 15 Xe'yei
19 Xeyei
26 Xe'yei
XVli. I TrapaXo/i/Safei *
31 Xe'you(Tii/
1 It is noticeable that in Matthew the words which signifyspeaking^e'-yet,
\fyovffiv, (prjaiv) constitute slightly more than three-fourths of the whole
number, being 59 out of the 78 ; while in Mark they constitute less than
half, being 72 out of the 151.
VI
S/. Mark's Gospel
149
xxvi. 5 2 Xeyei
64 Xeyei
71 Xe'yet
xxvii. 13 Xe'yei
22 Xe'yei
,, Xe'yovtrtv
38 a-ravpovvrai *
xxviii. 10 Xeyei
* These are the 21 cases in which Matthew agrees with Mark in
using the historic present.
Matthew also uses the following 1 5 presents in Parables :
xxi.
3*
Xe'yei
xxvi. 31
Xe'yei
*
4i
XeyouTiv
35
Xe'yei
42
Xeyei
36
epxe 7
ni
*
xxii.
16
a7roo-r;XXov-
Xe'yei
*
aw*
38
Xeyei
*
20 Xeyei *
40
epx
at
*
21
XeyovoHi/
CVpi(TKft *
\ X
N. /
*
91
Aeyei
>
Ac j/cl
42
Xeyouo'ii'
45
epx*i
-at
*
43
Xe'yei
Xe'yei
*
xiii. 28 Xe'yovo-iy
29 viii. 49 epxfroi t xi. 37 epcora xi. 45 Xeyei
Besides the above 4 cases, there are only the following 2, which
are in passages double-bracketed by WH and omitted by Tisch :
xxiv. 12 /SXeVfi (as in Jn xx. 5) xxiv. 36 Xe'yei l (as in Jn xx. 19)
t Agreeing with the epx ov * n Mk v. 35.
Luke also uses the following 5 presents in Parables :
xiii. 8 Xeyei xvi. 7 Xeyet xvi. 23 opa xvi. 29 Xtyet xix. 22 Xe'yet
It may be added that in Acts there are 13 Historic Presents :
viii. 36 (prjaiv xxii. 2
x. II Gtcopel xxiii. 1 8
27 eupiovcet xxv. 5
31 ^ai' * 22
24
xxvi. 24
xii. 8 \eyft
xix. 35 (prjaiv
xxi. 37 Xe'yet
1 Except in this one very doubtful case, Luke never uses \eyei of Jesus
(Abbott, in Enc. Bibl, ii. 1766).
2 In the recital by Cornelius.
150 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
SECTION VII
THE CONJUNCTION Kat PREFERRED TO M IN MARK
The two most constantly recurring causes of the agree-
ment of Matthew and Luke against Mark are two
preferences of Mark, viz. (i) for Xiyeiv instead of etTreir, as
referred to in the last section, and (ii) for Kat instead of de.
The latter preference requires a few words of notice in any
close examination of the Marcan peculiarities, though the
difference in meaning between the two conjunctions is
practically so slight ; for, as Winer points out, 1 ' Ac is
often used when the writer merely subjoins something
new, different, and distinct from what precedes, but on
that account not sharply opposed to it. ... Hence in the
Synoptic Gospels Kat and 8e are sometimes parallel.'
Now there are at least 26 cases in which both
Matthew and Luke have 8e where Mark has Kat: see
Mk iii. 4, 32 ; iv. n, 18, 20, 35 ; v. 13, 14 ; vi. 35, 37 b ; viii.
28 b t 36 ; ix. 30 ; x. 23 ; xi. 4, 8, 9, 18, 31 ; xii. 35 ; xiii. 3 ;
xiv. 12, 53, 54; xv. 15 b ; xvi. i, and parallels.
Such cases must of course be counted in by those who
are enumerating the points of agreement between Matthew
and Luke against Mark. But it seems to me that they
carry hardly any weight as signs either (a) that the
Petrine source which Matthew and Luke used was different
in language from our Gospel of Mark, or (b) that either
Matthew or Luke must have seen the other's Gospel. 2
For it is to be observed, first, that Mark's preference for
Kat rather than 6^ is a characteristic of his style throughout
his Gospel. 3 Two proofs of this may be given :
1 liii. 7 b.
2 See Abbott, Corrections of Mark, 536 ff. ; and Enc. Brit. , x. 807 a.
* Chapter xiii is an exception ; and, speaking generally, 8( is less rare
in the later than in the earlier chapters.
vn St. Mark's Gospel 151
1. He uses 8e less than half as freely as the other
Synoptists do. For 8^ is found in Mark only about
156 times, 1 whereas it would be found quite 300
times if its use was as general as it is in Matthew
and Luke, where it is employed about 496 and
508 times respectively (those Gospels being longer
than Mark by more than one-third).
2. If we take the sections and sub-sections of Mark, as
denoted in WH by fresh paragraphs and by spaces
respectively, they amount together to 88. Of these
no less than 80 begin with KCU, and of the others only 6
have 8e as the second word. But in Matthew out of
159 such divisions only 38 begin with KCU, while 54
have 8e as the second word ; and in Luke out of the
145 divisions only 53 begin with KCU, while 83 have 8e
as the second word (including 8e Kat 4 times).
Therefore, in the above-mentioned places where Matthew
and Luke agree against Mark, the three were only adhering
to their habitual preference.
And, secondly, it is worth notice that we see in the LXX
that different writers (in this case, different translators)
had their personal proclivities in this little matter, though
KCU largely preponderates on the whole as the rendering
of the Hebrew copula. 2 If we take as specimens a few
chapters from the historical books, we find 8e used toler-
ably often in Gen iv, xviii, xix ; Ex iii-vi, whereas it is
very nearly absent from Judg xiii-xiv ; 3 Ki xvi-xxii ;
Neh i-ii (=2 Esdr xi, xii). 3 If, then, other Hellenistic
1 For these numbers I have had to rely on Bruder, with some corrections
of my own : Moulton and Geden do not give Se or /rat. On John see Abbott,
Joh. Gram., 2133^
2 It is curious that, as to this one small point only, Mark should be nearer
to LXX usage than Matthew or Luke. See Appendix A to Part III, 'The
Synoptists and the Septuagint ' (p. 198).
3 In these eleven chapters there are but five instances of 5e, viz. 3 Ki
xvii. 13 ; xx. 2, 6 ; xxi. 23, 39. In Jonah there are but four instances, viz.
i. 5; ii. 10 (in the Psalm) ; iii. 3 ; iv. n.
152 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. A
writers thus varied in their use of these conjunctions, we
need not look for anything suggestive or significant in the
fact that Matthew and Luke happened to have one habit,
and Mark another habit in this same matter, and that
consequently two of them often agree against the third
when we can compare them in the triple narrative.
On the whole it seems to me that such an examination
of the Marcan peculiarities as has now been attempted
supplies results which are largely in favour of the view
that the Petrine source used by the two later Synoptists was
not an ' Ur-Marcus ', but St. Mark's Gospel almost as we
have it now. Almost ; but not quite. For instance, a later
editor's hand is very probably to be seen in i. I ('Jesus
Christ l ') ; ix. 41 (' Christ's 2 ') ; probably also in the inser-
tion of ' the gospel 3 ' and ' persecutions ' in viii. 35 and x.
29, 30 ; perhaps also in the reference to ' the Jews ' in vii.
34 ; 4 and again in the numerals 200 and 300 (vi. 37 ; xiv. 5),
both of which are also found in the Johannine tradition 5
(vi. 7 ; xii. 5) ; and possibly in a few other cases of
additional matter, such as the ' 2000 ' in v. 13, and the
disagreement of the witnesses in xiv. 56, 59.
For these last four are interesting and definite particulars
1 For the only other occurrences of 'Jesus Christ ' in the Gospels are Mt. i. i,
18 (?) ; xvi. 21 (?) ; Jn i. 17 ; xvii. 3 : it (or ' Christ Jesus') is found 15 times
in Acts and very frequently in the Epistles.
2 For ' Christ ' as a name is found without the article here only in the four
Gospels and Acts (Lk xxiii. 2 not being a case in point) : with the article
Mt i. 17 ; xi. 2 xxiii. 10 ; Acts ii. 31 and viii. 5 : and in the Epistles fre-
quently both without and with the article. In this verse too Mark's vSaros
may perhaps seem less original than Matthew's more unusual faxpov (x. 42).
3 fvayytkiov, however, is a word generally characteristic of Mark (p. 10).
* For, excluding the phrase ' King of the Jews ', this title is used in the
plural only 4 times in the Synoptic Gospels (here ; Mt xxviii. 15 ; Lk vii 3 ;
xxiii. 51) ; but in John 63 times (excluding iii, 25 but including iv. 96), and
in Acts 70 times.
5 But on the relations between this and Mark compare Abbott, Joh. Voc. t
1731 ff.
vn S/. Mark's Gospel 153
such as, on the one hand, it seems extremely improbable
that both Matthew and Luke would have thought fit to
leave out, and such as, on the other hand, a subsequent
editor, or scribe, or owner of a Gospel 1 would wish to add,
if they had happened to come to his knowledge. 2
1 See Sanday, Inspiration, pp. 295, 297, 0:1 the 'freedom' which seems to
have been used ' in propagating the text of the Gospels ' : also Blass, Philology'
of the Gospels, pp. 77 ff. ; A. Robinson, Study of Gospels, p. 24.
2 On the agreements of Matthew and Luke against Mark, where they seem
to be using the Marcan document as a Grundschrift, see below, Appendix B
to Part III. On possible compilation in the Second Gospel see above,
p. 116.
B. ON THE GOSPEL OF ST. MATTHEW.
IN the following sections will be collected some phe-
nomena of this Gospel, bearing upon the method and
purpose of its composition. The word composition is an
appropriate one, for in turning from Mark to Matthew we
have passed from the simplest of our Gospels to that in
which there are the clearest signs of compilation and of
artificial arrangement (see especially Sections III, IV). 1
SECTION I
THE QUOTATIONS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT
It has often been noticed 2 that the quotations which
are introduced by the Evangelist himself agree much less
closely with the LXX than those which occur in the course
of the common narrative. The following tables will show
to what a remarkable extent this is the case :
CLASS I. Quotations avowedly introduced by the Author
or Editor of the Gospel?
Words
Words
Words
Words
in
not in
in
not in
No.
LXX.
LXX.
No.
LXX.
LXX.
I.
Mt i. 23 .
13
2
7-
Mt xii.
18-21 .
20
31
2.
ii. 15 .
2
4
8.
xiii.
35 -
6
4
3-
18 .
14
6
9-
xxi.
5 a -
10
7
4-
23 -
.
...
10.
xxvii.
9, 10.
4
21
5-
iv. 15, 16
20
13
6.
viii. 17 .
2
7
100
95
a Also quoted in Jn xii. 15.
1 On some contradictions apparently resulting from such compilation see
Julicher, Introd. to N. T., E. T., pp. 312 f., 316.
2 e. g. by Bp. Westcott, Introd. to Study of Gospels, p. 229 (8th ed., 1895).
See Swete, Introd. to O. T. in Greek, pp. 392 ff. ; Burkitt, Gospel History, &c.,
pp. 124 ff.
3 On the difference in character between these quotations and those
ascribed to Jesus Himself see the striking remarks of Burkitt, op. '/.,
pp. 202 f.
pt. in. B. i S/. Matthew's Gospel
CLASS II. One quotation recorded as spoken by the Scribes
in the Introductory Chapters I and II.
Mt ii. 6 contains 8 words that are in LXX, and 16 that are not
in LXX.
CLASS III. Quotations recorded as spoken in the part of
the Sermon on the Mount pecidiar to Matthew.
No.
I.
2.
3-
4-
Mt V. 21
27
31
33
Words
Words
in
not in
LXX.
LXX.
No.
2
...
5-
Mt v. 38
2
...
6.
43
3
6
2 (?
) 7
Words
in
LXX.
6
4
Words
not in
LXX.
I
5
19
The prefixed fppfdrj seems to mark these passages as intended to
be quotations, so they are placed here for consideration. In v. 43
the words KKai> air metr olvov /acra xoAijs fze/xiyjueVoi>,
where Mk xv. 23 has fa-fjLvpvia-fjifvov : cf. Ps Ixviii. (Ixix.)
22 edo>Kaz> . . . \o\i]v. z
2. Mt xxvii. 43, where several words from Ps xxi. (xxii.) 9
are attributed to the mocking chief priests, &c.
3. Mt xxvii. 57 is the only place in which the word
TrXowto?, used in Is liii. 9 in connexion with ra>r; and
Oavaros, is applied to Joseph of Arimathaea.
SECTION II
THE SHORTENING OF NARRATIVES IN MATTHEW
There is in this Gospel an observable tendency to
shorten the common narrative, especially by condensation
or omission in those parts of it which do not lead up to,
or directly bear upon, sayings of Jesus. This characteristic
of Matthew may in many cases be measured and appre-
ciated by the simple means of noticing the amounts of
space which the three narratives occupy in the parallel
1 Cf. Bp. Gore, Dissertations on Subjects connected with the Incarnation, p. 32,
where he admits that the above two details and the l gall ' in Mt xxvii.
34 ' may be modifications due to the influence of the language of Zechariah
and the Psalmist respectively. But in all these cases the historical event
stands substantially the same when the modification is removed. 1 See also
Swete on Mk xi. 2 and 7 to the same effect. And we may compare Justin's
further addition (Apol. I. xxxii) that the colt was ' bound to a vine ', as in
Gen xlix. n.
2 Similarly the frfjpovv avrov of xxvii. 36 may have been suggested by
Ps xxi. (xxii.) 1 8 fcarevorjffav KO.I fireiSov fie : the words are not identical, but
both are in close connexion with the division of the garments.
ii 5/. Matthew's Gospel 159
columns of Tischendorfs Synopsis Evangelica, or some
other Harmony. But it may be worth while to give
here the numbers of the words employed in some of those
passages :
in Number of words
Tisch in
Syn. Ev. Mt Mt Mk Lk
35. viii. 1-4 The leper healed ... 61 97 98
36. ix. 1-8 The paralytic healed . . 126 196 212
51. viii. 18, 23-7 The first storm on the lake . 86- 122 93
52. 28-34 The Gadarene demoniac(s) . 136 325 293
53. ix. 18-26 The issue of blood healed, and
Jairus' daughter raised . 135 374 289
59. xiv. 13-21 The feeding of the 5,000 . . 157 235 163
72. xvii. 14-21 The lunatic boy cured x . . 132 270 125
1 1 8. xx. 29-34 The blind men (or man) at
Jericho ..... 77 123 107
144. xxvi. 17-19 The preparation for the Passover 61 98 96
Total . . 971 1840 1476
In 51 the difference is not great ; and in 59 and 72,
Matthew and Luke are nearly equal, Luke being slightly
the shortest in 72, while Mark is much longer than either
of them. Of course there are other cases in which the
narratives are substantially identical in length, and there
is one case, viz. 48, the mother and brethren desiring to
see Jesus, in which Luke is the shortest. 2 But, on the
whole, the figures given above seem to me amply sufficient
to establish the existence of this Matthaean habit in places
where we can compare the three narratives. And if that is
granted, it gives likelihood to the alternative that, where
Matthew has a shorter narrative than either Mark or Luke
1 Though the four verses of dialogue Mk ix. 21-4 are omitted by Matthew,
he has a reference to verse 22 in his verse 15 which shows that they were
not unknown to him, but were purposely left unused.
2 This is the case even when Mt xii. 47, which Tisch brackets and WH
place in their margin, is excluded. Perhaps Luke's brevity here may be
connected with the fact that he alone records the similar incident in
xi. 27, 28 (Tisch 91 c). Luke is also briefest at the commencement
of 124, the expulsion of traffickers from the Temple. But, as a general
rule, Matthew's preference is for compression, Luke's for omission (A. Robin-
son, op. '/., p. 34).
160 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. B
(in the absence of a third parallel), it was he who abbre-
viated, and not either of them who expanded, the matter
contained in their source. Most of such cases are of course
parallels with Mark, since the parallels between Matthew
and Luke only are mainly in discourses and very rarely in
narratives. The following are instances of both kinds :
M
Number of
Tisch
words in
Syn.
Et;. Mt
Mk
Mt
Mk
25
A. xiv. 3-5 ;
vi. 17-20 .
. The Baptist imprisoned 1
40
76
54-
xiii. 54-8 ;
1-6 .
. The rejection at Nazareth
96
123
57-
xiv. 6-12 ;
21-9
. The Baptist beheaded .
95
171
61.
34- 6 ;
53-6 .
. Healings at Gennesaret .
44
72
123,
125.
| xxi. 18-20 ;
xi. 12-14, 2 >
21 The barren fig- tree .
54
77
Total . .
329
5192
in Number of
Tisch words in
Syn. Ev. Mt Lk Mt Lk
42. viii. 5-10, 13 3 ; vii. ib-io . The centurion's servant . 123 175
44. xi. 2-6 ; 18-23 . The Baptist's message . 63 103
Total . . 186 278
The above statistics are significant, both (i) in illus-
tration of the general tendency of Matthew and Luke
(and especially Matthew) to omit or condense Mark's
subsidiary and pleonastic details, which has been already
suggested (pp. 125 ff.), and also (ii) in connexion with the
signs of adaptation for catechetical purposes in Matthew,
which will be referred to further on (p. 163).*
1 Lk iii. 19, 20 is not cited here because, though similar in substance,
it is placed in a different part of the narrative.
2 Mt xv. 21-8 ; Mk vii. 24-30, the story of the Syrophenician, may be
mentioned as constituting an unusual case ; for while there is a good deal
of matter peculiar to each narrative, the length of them is not far from the
same (Mt 139 words, Mk 130).
3 Mt viii. n, 12 is not included here, because Luke gives it substantially
elsewhere, and apparently in its original place (xiii. 28, 29). If its 43
words were included, Luke's narrative would still be slightly the longer.
4 See Additional Note, p. 214.
m S/. Matthew's Gospel 161
SECTION III
SIGNS OF COMPILATION IN MATTHEW
It has been already noticed (p. no) that, in recording
sayings of Jesus, Matthew and Luke seem often to draw
materials from the same source, but that in more than
two-thirds of such cases they arrange the materials differ-
ently. We have now to notice further that this difference
of arrangement is very frequently caused by Matthew
placing the sayings together in large blocks of discourse,
while Luke records them separately, and in many cases
gives the questions or circumstances which led up to
them. The following are conspicuous instances of this
divergence :
1. Mt vi. 9-13 compared with Lk xi. 1-4 The Lord's Prayer.
2. 19-21 ,, xii. 33, 34 The treasure and the
heart.
3. 24 ,, ,, xvi. 13 God and mammon.
4- 25-33 ,, ,, xii. 22-31 Against anxiety.
5. vii. 7-11 ,, xi. 9-13 Ask and it shall be
given, &c.
6. 13, 14 ,. xiii. 23, 24 The narrow gate, or
door.
7. 22,23 jt 25-7 I never knew you, &c.
8. x. 17-22 ,, xxi. 12-17 x Persecutions foretold.
9. xiii. 16, 17 ,, ,, x. 23, 24 Blessed are your eyes,
&c.
10. 3 J -3 ?? xiii. 18, i9 2 Parables of Mustard Seed
and Leaven.
IT. xviii. 12, 13 ,, ,, xv. 4-7 The Lost Sheep.
12. xxiii. 37-9 3 ,, xiii. 33-6 O Jerusalem, &c.
13. xxiv. 28 ,, ,, xvii. 37 The eagles gathered to-
gether.
1 Both this passage and Mk xiii. 9-13 are more closely parallel to Mt x.
17-22 than to Mt xxiv. 9-14. But the words certainly appear very unlikely
to have been spoken at the first and temporary mission of the Apostles
recorded in chapter x. It seems as if Matthew had at this point looked
through all his materials, and collected from them all the sayings that had
any bearing upon missionary work.
2 ovv, which is the true reading, seems intended to exhibit these pro-
phetic parables as called forth by the success and progress recorded
in v. 17.
3 The connexion in Matthew seems sufficiently good, but that in Luke
is better still.
HAWKINS
162 Statistics and Observations pt. in. B
If these parallel passages, and especially Nos. 1-7, are
examined, it will be seen that two accounts of the
differences in their situations and contexts may be given.
Speaking generally (for opinions will differ as to particular
cases, especially towards the end of the list), either (a)
Matthew altered their places, mainly with the purpose
of combining them in collections of sayings, or (b) Luke
did so, with the purpose of breaking up those collections
into their component parts, and supplying for as many
of the sayings as possible the occasions which drew them
forth. Without attempting to decide or foreclose the
question, I must say that to me the former alternative
seems by far the more intrinsically probable, and by far the
more accordant with the phenomena before us. 1
Those who agree with me in adopting that alternative
will feel that the above instances lend some a priori
probability to the supposition that it was Matthew, rather
than Luke or Mark, who transferred sayings in such cases
as the following :
1. Mt v. 13 compared with \ M . k ' 5 a } Salt losing its savour.
I Lk xiv. 33, 34 2 f
2. (?) vi. 14 ,, Mk xi. 25 Forgiveness when
praying.
3. viii. ii, 12 ,, Lk xiii. 28. 29 Many shall come from
east and west, &c.
4- x - 34, 35 ,, xii. 51-3 Not peace but a sword,
&c.
5. 37 xiv. 26 Loving (or hating)
father or mother, &c. 3
6. 42 ,, ,, Mk ix. 41 Giving a cup of cold
water. 3
1 Among the numerous modern supporters of this view, I would specify two
American writers as particularly clear and forcible, Bacon, Sermon on the
Mount, pp. 226 ff., also 222 note ; and E. D. Burton, Principles of Literary
Criticism, &c.,pp. 35 ff. Another Chicago publication, Hobson's The Diates-
saron of Tatian and the Syn. Problem (1904), brings out the way in which this
process of compiling discourses was carried still further by Tatian, especially
in his use of Luke's so-called Perean section (pp. 59-61, 76).
2 Observe the connexion implied by ovv.
8 Whether in these two cases the sayings come from the same source
is very doubtful. See also p. 152.
in S/. Matthew's Gospel 163
7. Mt xi. 21-4 compared with Lk x. 13-15 Woe to Chorazin, &c.
8. 25-27 ,, 21-23 Things hidden from the
wise and prudent, &c.
( xxiii. 4, 6, 13, 23, ) f xi. 39, 42, ) Woes pronounced on
9- ] 2 5, 27, 29, > \ 43, 46- [ the Pharisees, &c.
f 31,34-6 ) ( 52 )
10. xxiv. 27 xvii. 24 As the lightning in the
heavens.
\ xvii. 26, 27, | As in the days of
I 34, 35 { Noah, &c.
12. 43-51 ,, xii. 39-46 Watchfulness.
See also other cases among the doublets (pp. 80 ff.), and
among the passages marked * on pp. 108 f. : and cf. p. 195 (a).
SECTION IV
TRACES OF NUMERICAL ARRANGEMENTS IN MATTHEW
Beneath the surface of this Gospel (and in one single
case, viz. i. 17, upon its surface) there are to be found in-
dications that it embodies some amount of matter which
had been arranged in artificial and numerical forms, such as
would assist the memories of oral teachers and of learners.
This seems to have been done in Jewish fashion, and
perhaps especially for the use of Jewish-Christian cate-
chists and catechumens. The traces of it are found most
often, though not exclusively, in those blocks of discourse
which have already been referred to as showing signs of
compilation.
A.
There seem to have been five principal Pereqs or
chapters of such sayings : for when we think of (a) the five
books of the Pentateuch, (b) the five books of Psalms, 1 (c) the
five Megilloth,(^/) \hzfive divisions which Dr. Edersheim and
1 Dr. C. A. Briggs attributes this division of the Psalter ' to the middle of
the second century, shortly before its translation into Greek ', and regards it
as 'in some way connected with the five great feasts of Judaism ' (Int. Crit.
Comm. on Pss. I. Ixxxviii).
M 2
164 Statistics and Observations pt.m. B
others trace in Ecclesiasticus, 1 (e) the Maccabaean history
' by Jason of Cyrene in five books ' which the writer of
1 Maccabees says (ii. 23) that he will * assay to abridge in
one work ', in the course of which traces of a fivefold division
seem still to show themselves in certain breaks, 2 (f)tint five
parts which (besides some interpolations) Dr. Charles as well
as previous scholars sees in the Book of Enoch, 3 and (g) the
five Pereqs which make up the Pirqe Aboth> as distinct from
the supplementary Pereq of R. Meir, it is hard to believe
that it is by accident that we find in a writer with the
Jewish affinities of Matthew the jfa# times repeated formula
about Jesus ''ending' His sayings (vii. 28 ; xi. i ; xiii. 53 ;
xix. 1 1 ; xxvi. i). Are we not reminded of the colophon which
still closes the second book of Psalms, ' The prayers of
David the son of Jesse are ended ' (Ps Ixxii. ao) ? 4
And as to early Christian literature, we are told by
Eusebius both that the Exposition of Oracles of the Lord by
Papias was divided vnto five avyypd^aTa (H. E. iii. 39, refer-
ring to Irenaeus, who calls them /3i/3Aia), which may perhaps
imply that he found the oracles which he expounded thus
divided already ; and also that the work of Hegesippus which
had come down to his days consisted of five memoirs or
commentaries ({/Tro/ui^/xara, H. E. iv. 33). G
1 Speaker's Comm. on Ecclus., p. 19. Mr. R. G. Moulton speaks of the
number 5 as seeming to be the favourite number in Wisdom literature
generally : ' five books in Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus, five essays in Ecclesi-
astes, and five discourses in Wisdom' ; Literary Study of the Bible, p. 404 :
see also pp. 284, 386. But he does not seem to me to give satisfactory
proofs of this, except as to Ecclesiasticus and perhaps Proverbs.
2 Viz. at iii. 40; vii. 42 ; x. 9, 10; xiii. 266 ; xv. 37. It should be observed
especially how the verb 8r)\ovv, which is used in ii. 23, reappears in vii. 42
and x. 10.
3 See Book of Enoch, ed. Charles, pp. 25-32 ; Enc. Bibl. i. 221 f. ; Hastings'
D. B. i. 706.
* The LXX word here is el\iitov. For ovveTeXtafv used of the completion
of discourse see Deut xxxi. i ; xxxii. 45 (B If ere A.e? . . . ras evdvufoeis avTwv ix. 4 ; xii. 25 (evOvfujms only Acts 1,
Hebrews 1 besides, and not in LXX).
7. TO 7rpo/3aTa ra aTroXwXora OI'KOU 'lo-pa^X X. 6 ; XV. 24.
8. cv rats (rvvayayals avruv naa-Tiyv xxiii. 34.
9. ev cKtivto TWKaipw xi. 2$ ; xii. I ; xiv. I (Lk has Iv OUTWT. K. in xiii. I,
and KUT K. K. in Acts xii. i and xix. 23).
10. ws 6 rjXios xiii. 43 ; xvii. 2 (so Rev i. 19 ; x. i).
11. ^wpis yvvaiK&v KOI TraiSiW xiv. 21 ; xv. 38.
12. 687/70! rvcpXot xv. 14 ; xxiii. 16, 24.
13. Tore fivai OVTOV 7rpo(Tu^d/Lie^oy ix. l8; xi.' I. (See also p. I95-)
9. TTTw^ouy, dvaneipovs, ^coXoy?, rv(p\ovs xiv. 13, with which cf. the very
similar verse 21.
10. Kal rijv yvvaiKa xiv. 26 ; ^ yvvaiKa xviii. 29.
11. ot viol TOV alwvos TOVTOV xvi. 8 ; xx. 34.
12. TU7rre ro (Trrjdos eavrov xviii. 13 ; rvrrrovTes TO. VTai 7 ' also oxpeWrat aov at d/nap-
Ttat . . . Tis OVTOS fO~Tiv os Kai a/jLapTias dcpirjaiv | Lk vii. 48, 49.
2. fj Trio-Tis orov o~o-(*Kv erf Lk viii. 48 = Mk v. 34 = Mt ix. 22 ] and
Lk xviii. 42 = Mk x. 52 : also Lk vii. 50 and xvii. 19.
3. TTopevov els eipfjvTjv Lk viii. 48 = Mk v. 34 (waye) : also Lk vii. 50.
(Cf. Acts xvi. 36 ; Jam ii. 16.)
4. HTJKCTI ovcuXXe TOV 8iddo~Ka\ov Lk viii. 49 = TI en o~Kv\\eis TOV 818. ;
Mk v. 35 : also Kvpie, ^ O-KV\\OV Lk vii. 6.
5. ot de fjyvoovv TO pfjfM TOVTO Lk ix. 45 = Mk ix. 32 : also compare
TJV TO pruia. TOVTO KCKpvp.jji.evov an avT&v, KOI OVK eyivuvKov TO. Xcyd-
fjifva Lk xviii. 34.
6. TI TToirjo-as farjv aiwviov K\r}povofifjo-a) ; Lk xviii. 1 8 = Mk x. 17 (TI
Trotjyao) ?va, and cf. also Mt xix. 16 o-^co) : also Lk x. 25.
7. OVK dK d(pf)o-ov-
o-iv \idov eVi Xt^ov eV trot.
But such repetitions are much more frequent in Matthew,
and therefore they are treated here in connexion with that
Gospel especially. Thus we find :
^tSi/cov Mt iii. 7 = Lk Hi. 7 : also Mt xii. 34 and
xxiii. 33. (Cf. the transfer of the Baptist's words in Doublet
No. 20, pp. 97 f.)
2. ev uevo'oKrjo-a Mt iii. 17 = Mk i. Ii = Lk iii. 22 : also Mt xvii. 5.
3. fjyyiKev 17 /3aV 686vro)v Mt viii. 12 = Lk
xiii. 28 : also Mt xiii. 42, 50 ; xxii. 13 ; xxiv. 51 ; xxv. 30.
7. oi Trpo^rai /cat 6 vopos Mt xi. 13 = Lk xvi. l6 (6 i/d/u'. KOI ot 7rpo$.) :
also (in the latter order) Mt v. 17, and vii. 12, and xxii. 40.
8. oWiff . . . av noirjo-T] TO 6f\r]p.a TOV iraTpos pov Mt xii. 50= Mk iii. 35
(os av . . . TOV 0eo) : also Mt vii. 21 (6 iroi5>v) ; cf. also xxi. 31.
9. vnayf oTTtVco p,ov, 2arai/5 Mt xvi. 23 = Mk viii. 33 : also i/Traye,
Sarai/a Mt iv. IO.
10. e/xe de^erat Mt xviii. 5 = Mk ix. 37 = Lk ix. 48 (of receiving
v S/. Matthew's Gospel 171
children) : also in Mt x. 40 (of receiving the Apostles ; it does
not occur in Lk x. 16, which compare).
11. f\erjaov . . . vlos (or vie) Aaua'S Mt XX. 30, 31 = Mk X. 47, 48 = Lk
xviii. 38, 39 : also Mt ix. 27 ; xv. 22.
12. (pofiuviJLfda TOV o^Xoy, irdvTfs yap ws npofpfjTTjv . . . a'XXoi> dov\ov . . . KOI a\\ov (cf. also Lk XX. II, 12) :
also Mt xxii. 4 rraXiv aTreVrciXfv aXXovs SouXovff.
15. aTroXeVet avrovs Mt xxi. 41 = Mk xii. 9, and Lk xx. 16 tMroXfVei
Tovff yewpyovs '. also Mt xxii. 7 aTrooXeo-ei/ rovs (povcls fKfivovs.
1 6. d'yaTr^o'fiS' TOV n\r)o~iov o~ov a>s (Tfavjov quoted in Mt xxii. 39 =
Mk xii. 31 (and cf. Lk x. 27) : also in Mt xix. 19.
17. o\l/oiTai TOV vlov TOV dvOpwTTov fpxopfvov Mt xxiv. 37rov ep%6p,evov (where
Mk ix. I and Lk ix. 27 mention only the kingdom as being
seen).
1 8. d\rjdv CIVTOVS ojs cfywcriav t^wv, KOI ov% o>? ol y pa [Awards
(Mark adds auro>i>), (a) in Mk i. 22 referred to the first preaching
in the Capernaum Synagogue (and so Lk iv. 32 eV e^owia r\v
6 Xdyos auTou), but (b] in Mt vii. 29 referred to the impression
made by the Sermon on the Mount much later in the Ministry.
2. KOKWS exovras TroiKiXais voo-ois, used (a) in Mk i. 34 (cf. Lk iv. 40)
of the healings at eventide, but (b} combined in Mt iv. 24 with
some other words from Mk iii. 7 ff. before the Sermon on the
Mount.
3. on T)s (Mt oxrei) 7rpo/3ara /j.f) e^oz/ra Troifieva (Numb
xxvii. 17 LXX) ; (a] in Mk vi. 34 placed before the Feeding of
the 5,000, but (b} in Mt ix. 36 before the Mission of the Twelve
which occurred earlier.
4. KOI dfpevres avrbv a7rf)\6av, used (a) in Mk xii. 12 after the
Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen, but (b) in Mt xxii. 22 after
the question as to tribute to Caesar rather later.
(ii) Formulas differently placed by Matthew, by Mark,
and by Luke :
i. ov8c\s ovKeri e'roX/ua avrov eTTfparr^oYu is (in substance) placed
(a) in Mk xii. 34, after the Two Great Commandments (omitted
here in Luke) ;
(b} in Mt xxii. 46, after the subsequent reference to Psalm ex ;
but
(c) in Lk xx. 40, after the earlier confutation of the Sadducees.
1 Compare the suggestions made on pp. 93-5.
2 Or almost always; for perhaps an exception may be found in the
commendations by scribes given by Mark and Luke only, viz. (a) KO.\>S,
Si$a(jna\, ITT' akrjOeias elves in Mk xii. 32 after the two great command-
ments, but (b) 8i8daKa\e, Ka\u>s eiWs in Lk xx. 39 after the confutation of the
Sadducees.
v St. Matthew's Gospel 173
2. c{-f7r\f) an ^
Overbeck, p. 248, both in Eng. tr., besides more recent writers.
2 The tables given above on pp. 16-23 and 27-9 supply materials for
many such proofs.
3 'Verbs compounded with prepositions' was the title of a third such
Div. I. i
S/. Luke's Gospel
A. Words peculiar to one or other Gospel and to Acts.
Fifty-eight words are peculiar to Luke and Acts, viz. 1 :
7rpo/3dXXo)
TrpoTTOpevo/zm
Trpoa-doKia
35
5 dvaffirda)
dva(j)aivop.ai
dvTflnov
10
ajroTivao'O'a)
\ai as occurring never in Matthew or Mark, once in
Luke, and 5, 8, 9, 8, 7 times respectively in Acts. And the supple-
mentary lists on pp. 27-9 will suggest some other cases which are
more or less in point.
Under this heading, and the subsequent ones, a few words
are bracketed ( ) : these are comparatively unimportant as
linguistic evidence, because they may be mainly accounted
for by the subject-matter.
ii. Words and phrases never occurring in Luke, but
frequently in Acts.
(Under the preceding heading (i) we had words, &c.,
which might be quoted as evidence both for the similarity
and the dissimilarity between Luke and Acts : under this
and the following headings (ii, iii, iv, v) the dissimilarity
alone is brought out.)
Acts.
Chaps. Chaps.
Total. i-xii. xiii-xxviii.
alpe&ig ..... 6 I 5
(ii^czAfzLt/^m^co . . o ^
(avBvTraros) .... 5 ... 5
y^os 9 4 5
5 SiaXeyo/uai ..... IO ... IO
eVavpioi/ 1 ..... IO 3 7
eViKaXeo/uai (of being named 2 ) . 9 8 i (?)
(of calling upon) . 1 1 4 7 3
624
IO eViVra/zat ..... 9 * 8
fjicTair ffjL7rop.cn .... 9 5 4
6p.o6vfiaS6v . ... 10 7 3
opap.a ..... II 8 3
15 TTpoovcaprepea) .... 6 6
repar ...... 9 7 2
/ O
Tj^peco ...... o o
(Xi\iapxos) 17 ... 17
2O ^ajpt'ov ..... 7 6 I
Total . . 172 71 101
1 With TT? (iravptov compare (irl rty avpiov in Lk x. 35 ; Acts iv. 5 only.
2 Contrast with this the frequent use of fcaXovpfvos in Luke.
3 This includes the five or (including xxv. 21) six references to the
'appeal unto Caesar'.
Div. i. n 5/. Luke's Gospel 179
It is also remarkable that Luke has in his Gospel no instance of
the verb for ' he said ' being understood instead of expressed, as it
is in Actsii. 38 ; v. 9 ; ix. 5, n ; xix. 2 ; xxv. 22 ; xxvi. 25, 28, 29
(cf. also x. 15); nor of ..
fJLOVOV ...
vopifa ...
Trapi'oT/7/it, transitive
ovvepxofj,at ..
10 rpo<^ ...
rnot 'l
Luke.
Total.
Chaps,
i-xii.
Chaps,
xiii-xxviii.
2
14
3
II
2
10
5
5
2
6
6
3
12
2
10
I
I?
4
13
I
8
2
6
2
7
2
5
I
5
2
3
2
16
9
7
I
7
2
5
I
5
5
...
7
24
5
19
Total . . 25 131 41 90 l
is used quite differently in Luke and Acts, being in the
former applied only to persons, in the latter only to things known.
It is curious that 6 of the above 12 words should happen to be
used in Matthew much more frequently than in Luke, viz. fj
Matthew 10, Kara = ' against' Matthew 14, KC\(IKD Matthew 7,
Matthew 7, r/xxpj? Matthew 4, fopi Matthew 17. Two of the words
are strongly Pauline, viz. povov and TrapiW^i transitive, being used
36 and 13 times in the 1 3 Epistles.
iv. Words and phrases frequently occurring in Luke, but
never in Acts.
&?.
. II
7T\Ol>(TLOS I I
&.
ayairda) . . . . 12
d/otapreoXo? . . . .17
eyeveTo with a finite verb . 22 a-rpa(pfis .... 7
1 See also p. 152 note 4 on the use of 'Iov5a?o<.
3 In Acts ix. 40 ; xvi. 18 we find (iriffrptyas used as arpa^ets is used in the
Gospel.
N 2
180 Statistics and Observations Pt. in. c
On the last four of these words more statistics will be found on
pp. 16-23, where also will be found 31 other words and phrases,
which, while occurring 4 times and upwards in Luke's Gospel, and
being more or less characteristic of it, are absent from Acts.
v. Words and phrases frequently occurring in Luke, but
much more rarely in Acts.
Acts.
^
Chaps.
Chaps.
Luke.
Total.
i-xii. xrii-xxviii.
(OVTOV, &C.
57
22
8
14
eyfvcro with Kai .
II
I (?)
I (?)
...
(17TV Of, tllTOV O .
59
15
10
5
fv TW with infinitive .
32
.7
6
i
eep^O)Ufli OTTO
13
3
...
3
/cat avros, &C., nom. .
41
8
i
7
avros 6, &C.
ii
2
...
2
I c
i
^
Total .
o
239
62
27
35
'he doubtful case of eyeWro K
a* is in
Acts v. 7.
All but
the first
of the above 8 words, &c., and some others pointing less decidedly
in the same direction, may be examined on pp. 16-23. See also
p. 14 on tva (Luke 45, Acts 15) and contrast with it onus on p. 6
(Luke 7, Acts 14).
If the differences of vocabulary and phraseology which
have been collected under these five headings are considered
together, they seem to me to suggest the inference that the
two books, though the works of the same writer, could not
have proceeded from him at the same, or very nearly the
same, time. Would it be at all likely that an author (unless
he wished to conceal his identity, which we know from
Acts i. i that this author did not wish) would so alter his
style in two nearly contemporaneous books as, e.g., to drop
ei7rez> 8e, h rVp(TK(i)
5 a7T(mi>acr .
= kindle
with yiverrdai
IO
6/LttXeo) .
1 5 (TV vapirdfa
r
(cf. also Acts xiii. 44 ?)
Total
of Acts.
Luke.
I 2
I
...
I
...
I
4
2
...
I
...
3
...
2
2 I
2
3 3
3
...
I
i
I
i
2
...
I
5
3
2
i
i 3
2
i
I
30
23
28
1 Elsewhere the preposition is omitted.
2 On this and other notes of time see Harnack, Acts ofApp., E. T., pp. 10 f.,
3!-4.
3 See Prof. Burkitt's interesting comparison of the' We'-Sections with the
only account of a voyage in the third Gospel, viz. in viii. 22-5 (pp. tit., p. 1 12).
Div. I. in
Luke's Gospel
187
iii. Words and phrases found in the ' We '-Sections and also
used predominantly, though not exclusively, in the rest of
Acts or Luke or either of them
1 We ' Rest
of Acts.
.... 2 6
OTTOS 2 ..... I 9
oTTOo-Traco ..... I I
arotros ..... I I
5 @ov\r) ..... 2 5
diaXeyouai ..... 2 8
diavoiyw ..... I 2
Siarpt/Sa) ...... 2 6
IO eaa> ...... 3 4
ei (xxvii. 20, 40 ;
xxviii. 13 ?). 3 For ev0uSpojue'o> (xvi. ii ; xxi. i), Karayeo-0ai of
coming to shore (xxvii. 3; xxviii. 12; cf. Lk v. 11),
Ae'yojmai (xxvii. 8, 13), irXoos (xxi. 7 ; xxvii. 9, 10), v
(xxvii. 4, 7), and other such words are amply accounted for
by the subject-matter. We do not find elsewhere rf} ere'pa
for ' the next day ' (xx. 15 ?; xxvii. 3) ; but ' the next day '
happens to be spoken of so much more often in the ' We '-
Sections than in any other passages of the same length 4
that there is nothing remarkable in there being a larger
variety of Greek phrases to express it.
On the whole, then, there is an immense balance of
internal and linguistic evidence in favour of the view that
the original writer of these sections was the same person as
the main author of the Acts and of the third Gospel, and,
1 But see also ou (MKpav in Mk xii. 34 ; Jn xxi. 8.
2 On the medical use of irapaivf
papos (?)
rd(pos
dndvrrjo-is *
vinos
vo-repos (?) t
direvavTi (?) *
ofyyos *
30 xaXenos t
deiyuarifa
2O odvp/Jios
\|/'6i;So/itipri'p
10 BrjXos
OKVTjpOS
wpatos *
fKTOS *
o\a>s
Twenty-two words found in Mark (with or without Acts
also) and Paul only:
Trpoovcaprfpeo) *
5 oTroarepeo)
d
tipnvtvtt
One hundred and three words found in Luke (with or
without Acts also) and Paul only :
adr)\os dvaKpiva* * di/raTroSofia
aj/aXiV/cw
ava\v(i)
' ' *
IO ai/o/^ro?
5 dvd0ffj.d * (ivoid "t"
al(pvidios (e(pv.
WH in Luke)
avTaTroKpivopat
1 5
Div. I. iv
diro\oyeop,ai *
Spa*
2O dporptdo)
do-)dXeia *
drw'to *
aroiros *
dxdpuTTOs t
25
S/. Luke's Gospel
SiayyeXXa)
3O 8lpp.T)VVO> (?) *
Soy/za *
5uj/do-n/s * t
evypdfpofjuii
3 5
ea7rooreXXa> *
40
fVi/xeXeo/iai t
f7n>ai'j/a> * t
epyatfia *
45 cvyevrjs *
(j)i(TTT]fJLl
Karaya)
50
55 KlvdwCVto *
Kparaioopai
60
vop,odiddcrKa\os * t
65 olKovop.ia
OTTTao-ta *
6crtdrj;s
Trayis
70 TrayoTrXia
jravovpyta
irarpia
75 Treptrroie'ofiai * t
I 9 I
J.
TrpoSdr?/? * t
8O TTpOKOTTTO)
TTVKlxfc (?) * f
o-iyda> *
O-KOTJ eco
85 (TTflpOS
(TVVaVTl
crvve *
90
(TfOTTJplOV
95 V7roo-Tpe'(pu> (?) *
(popos
IOO (pp6vr)(ris
Xapiop.ai *
^nptrdco
Also the form o6r& * (for ovStis) may be noted ; and TO dpryupov *
used of quotations (p. 33).
Twenty-one words found in John (with or without Acts
also) and Paul only :
Karrjyopia t 1*5 ^ a p<^l^6fop.ai
fj.aivop.iii *
I O VOfJLr) f TTfplTOfJLT)
7rrj\6s
2O
*f
'lu-parjKfiTrjs *
O/iCOf
o?rXo^
6