CHAPTER 19

Luke 19:2. οὗτος ἦν] Lachm. has αὐτὸς [ἦν]. B K Π, min. Arm. Vulg. 19 :For. Vind. have only αὐτός. Tisch. has ην only, following L א, min. Copt. Goth. only. The Recepta is to be maintained; οὗτος was in some authorities altered mechanically into αὐτός, in accordance with the foregoing word; in others, omitted as being superfluous, on which assumption, sometimes also ἦν, nay, even καί (D), dropped away also.

Luke 19:4. συκομορέαν] see the exegetical remarks.

Instead of ἐκείνης Elz. has διʼ ἐκείνης, in opposition to decisive evidence, on the strength of which, also at Luke 19:7, πάντες is to be read instead of ἅπαντες.

Luke 19:5. εἶδεν αὐτὸν καί] is wanting in B L א, min. vss. Tisch. The transcriber passed at once from ΕΙδεν to ΕΙπεν.

Luke 19:13. ἔως] A B D K L R א, min. Or. Lucif. have ἐν ᾧ. Approved by Griesb., adopted by Lachm. and Tisch.; ἔως is an interpretation.

Luke 19:15. ἔδωκε] Lachm. Tisch. have δεδώκει, in accordance with B D L א, min. Cant. Verc. (Or.: ἐδεδώκει). An emendation.

Luke 19:17. εὖ] Lachm. and Tisch. have εὖγε, following B D, min. Vulg. It. Or. Lucif. The Recepta is from Matthew 25:23.

Luke 19:20. ἔτερος] Lachm. and Tisch. have ὁ ἕτερος, in accordance with B D L R א** min. A mechanical repetition of the article, in accordance with Luke 19:16; Luke 19:18.

Luke 19:23. τήν] is wanting in authorities so decisive, that, with Matth. Lachm. Tisch., it must be deleted.

The position of αὐτό immediately after ἄν has, it is true, A B L א in its favour (Lachm. Tisch.), yet the old reading ἀνέπραξα in A is against it, as it manifestly originated from the collocation of ἄν and ἔπραξα. So in Δ, ΑΝΕΠΡΑΞΑ is written as one word, although translated as two words. The separation might easily be marked by αὐτό placed between them.

Luke 19:26. Since γάρ is wanting in important authorities, while Vulg. It. have autem, it is to be regarded, with Tisch., as a connective addition, in accordance with Matthew 25:29.

ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ] is bracketed by Lachm., deleted by Tisch. It is wanting in B L א, min. Lucif., and has slipped in mechanically from Matthew 13:12, although there the construction is different. Comp. Mark 4:25.

Luke 19:27. ἐκείνους] B K L M א, min. Didym. have τούτους. To be preferred, with Bornem. and Tisch.; ἐκ. is an amendment by way of designating the absent.

Luke 19:31. αὐτῷ] is wanting in B D F L R א, min. vss. Or. Bracketed by Lachm., deleted by Tisch. The omission is occasioned by its absence in the parallels.

Luke 19:34. Before ὁ κύριος Lachm. Tisch. have ὅτι, certainly on preponderating evidence, but it is repeated from Luke 19:31.

Luke 19:37. πασῶν] Lachm. has πάντων, following B D. But πάντων came in through the reading γινομένων (instead of δυνάμ.), which is still found in D.

Luke 19:40. Lachm. and Tisch. have σιωπήσουσιν, in accordance with A B L R Δ א, min., to which also D adds confirmation by σιγήσουσιν. The Recepta is by way of an improvement.

Instead of κεκράξονται B L א have κράξουσιν, which rare form Tisch. has rightly adopted.

Luke 19:41. Elz. Griesb. Scholz have ἐπʼ αὐτῇ. But ἐπʼ αὐτήν is decisively attested. So Schulz, Lachm. Tisch.

Luke 19:42. καὶ σὺ καί γε ἐν τῇ ἡμ. σου ταύτῃ] Lachm. has bracketed καί γε, and deleted σου; the former is wanting in B D L א, 157, vss. Or.; the latter in A B D L א, min. vss. Or. Eus. Bas. Both are to be retained; καὶ γε dropped out in consequence of the preceding καὶ σύ, and then this drew after it the omission of σου, which after the simple καὶ σύ (without καὶ γε) did not seem in place.

The second σου is, indeed, wanting in B L א, 259, Or. Ir. (bracketed by Lachm.); but how easily might the word, which, moreover, might be dispensed with, drop out between the syllables ΝΗΝ and ΝΥΝ!

Luke 19:45. ἐν αὐτῷ] is wanting in B C L א, min. Copt. Arm. Goth. Rd. Or. In most of these authorities καὶ ἀγοράζοντας is also wanting. Tisch. deletes both, and both are from the parallels, from which D Λ, vss. have added still more.

Luke 19:46. Tisch. has καὶ ἔσται ὁ οἶκ. μου οἶκ. προσευχ., following B L R א (in which, however, κ. ἔσται is wanting by the first hand), min. Copt. Arm. Or. Rightly; the Recepta is from the parallels, from which, moreover, appears in C** κληθήσεται instead of ἐστίν.

Luke 19:1-2. This history[229] with the stamp of Luke’s language is worked up by him from tradition.

ὈΝΌΜΑΤΙ-G0- ΚΑΛΟΎΜ-G0-.] Comp. Luke 1:61. Classical writers would have said ὌΝΟΜΑ ΚΑΛ. (Herod. i. 173; Plat. Crat. p. 483 B).

Ζακχαῖος] = זַכַּי, pure, Ezra 2:9; Nehemiah 7:14. Even the name (among the Rabbins also, see Lightfoot, p. 870) shows him to be a Jew. See on Luke 19:9 and Castalio in loc. The Clementines represent him as a companion of Peter, and by him consecrated as bishop of Caesarea. See Hom. iii. 63, Recogn. iii. 65. Comp. Constit. Apost. vi. 8. 3, vii. 46. 1.

αὑτός] after the name (as Luke 8:41), his personal condition.

ἀρχιτελώνης] chief publican or tax-collector, probably a steward of the Roman farmer of the taxes, entrusted with supervision of the ordinary tax-collectors. Comp. Salmasius, de foen. trapez. p. 245 f.; Burm. vectig. populi Rom. p. 134. The tribute in Jericho may have had to do especially with the trade carried on there in the production and export of balsam (a trade which now no longer exists, see Robinson, Pal. II. p. 537).

ΚΑῚ ΟὟΤΟς ἮΝ] a prolix simplicity of style. Comp. Luke 2:37, Luke 7:12, Luke 20:28.

[229] According to Eichthal, II. p. 291, a mistaken copy of the call of Matthew (Matthew 9)!

Luke 19:3-4. Τίς ἐστι] i.e. which among those who were passing by is Jesus. “Fama notum vultu noscere cupiebat,” Grotius.

προδραμὼν ἔμπροσθεν] Comp. Tob 11:2; Plat. Gorg. p. 497 A; Xen. Cyrop. iv. 2. 23.

συκομορέαν] The form μορέα occurs in Nicander as quoted by Athen. I. p. 51, and συκομορέα, Geop. x. 3. 7; more frequently συκόμορος (Dioscor. i. 184; Aq. Amos 7:14; Suidas). The authorities, however, are very much divided between συκομορέαν (so now Tischendorf also, following B L D א) and συκομωρέαν (Lachmann); Galen also has μωρέα, de comp. med. 5 (in Wetstein on Luke 17:6). As, nevertheless, the reading συκομοραίαν also adds to the support of συκομόρ., although it is plainly a transcriber’s error, the Recepta is to be maintained. The word itself is = συκάμινος (see Dioscor. i 184): Egyptian fig tree, Luke 17:6.

ἐκείνης] see on Luke 5:9.

διέρχεσθαι] to pass through, through the city, Luke 19:1.

Luke 19:5-7. Whether Jesus had any personal knowledge of Zacchaeus, is a matter which could be decided only by circumstances unknown to us; and hence to bring in the higher knowledge of Jesus (Olshausen), as seeing him nevertheless directly in his inner nature, is in the case before us a course without sufficient justification, although Strauss, I. p. 575 f., builds thereon the view that the history is a variation of the theme of the intercourse with the publicans. According to Paulus, some one named the man to him.

σήμερον] emphatically, comp. Luke 19:9. This day is the day so important to thee, when I must abide in thy house (stay the night, John 1:39). δεῖ is spoken from the consciousness of the divine appointment (Luke 19:10), “as if He could not dispense with Zacchaeus, whom, nevertheless, everybody else avoided as a great sinner” (Luther, Predigt.).

Luke 19:7. The murmurers (διεγογγ., see on Luke 15:2) are Jews, who accompanied Jesus to the house of Zacchaeus, situated (Luke 19:1) before the city on the way towards Jerusalem, and here at the entrance, probably in the forecourt where the publican came to meet Jesus, saw how joyously he receives Him. Comp. on Luke 19:11.

παρὰ ἁμ. ἀνδρί] belongs to καταλῦσαι.

Luke 19:8. The supposition “Jesu cohortationes et monitiones tantam vim habuisse in Zacchaei animum,” etc. (Kuinoel, comp. Grotius), and that the murmuring and the vow did not occur till the morning of the departure (Schleiermacher, Olshausen), has no foundation in the text, in accordance with which it was rather the immediate personal impression of Jesus that seized and took possession of the wealthy chief publican in that manner. His vow includes the consciousness of his unworthiness of the great happiness that has befallen him through the entertainment of the Messiah, and his determination, for the sake of this happiness, to make abundant compensation for his former guilt. According to Paulus, the publican wished to confute the charge παρὰ ἁμαρτ. ἀνδρί, and said εἴ τινός τι ἐσυκοφ. κ.τ.λ. in the conviction of his innocence. This is opposed to the context, opposed to the preceding τὰ ἡμίσ. κ.τ.λ., and opposed to Luke 19:10; moreover, his whole style of asserting his innocence would be an unbecoming piece of parade.

σταθείς] he stood forth before Jesus,—a joyful confidence. Comp. on Luke 18:11.

ἡμίση] The form ἡμίσεα (Lachmann), which Attic writers approve, is a correction either from ἡμίση or from ἡμίσεια.[230] As to the substantival neuter, see Kühner, § 479 b; Bornemann, ad Xen. Cyrop. viii. 3. 41.

ΕἼ ΤΙΝΌς ΤΙ ἘΣΥΚΟΦ.] If I have taken anything from any one by fraud. The verb (Luke 3:14) is construed like ἀποστερεῖν τινός τι (Plut. Dem. iv.; Soph. Phil. 1267), ἀπολαύειν τινός τι (Xen. Hier. vii. 9, Mem. i. 6. 2; Plat. Crit. p. 54 A; Arist. Nub. 1231); among the Greeks with ΠΑΡΆ, Lys. p. 177, 32. The ΕἸ is not to make the matter uncertain, as though he were conscious to himself of no such extortion, but ΕἼ … ΤΙ is the milder expression of self-confession instead of Ὅ, ΤΙ. See Dissen, ad Dem. de cor. p. 195.

τετραπλοῦν] he professes himself ready for a measure of compensation, such as was ordained for theft, Ex. 21:37; 1 Samuel 12:3. Conip. Keil, Arch. § 154. 3. In respect of breach of trust and the like, it was ordained only that a fifth part above the value should be restored (Lev. 5:21 ff.; Numbers 5:6 f.).

[230] Tischendorf, namely, has adopted τὸ ἡμίσεια, in accordance with B L Q Λ א. Certainly in the classical writers ἡμίσεια (scil. μοῖρα or μερίς) is the substantival feminine of ἥμισυς, Thuc. vi. 62. 4; Plat. Leg. 12, p. 956 D, Ep. vii. p. 347 C; Dem. 430. 8; Lucian, Herm. 48; while τὰ ἡμίσεια occurs also at least in Antonin. Lib. ii. p. 16; hence it is all the more probable that Luke wrote it, but it was then changed into ἡμίσεα, and finally into ἡμίση.

Luke 19:9-10. Πρὸς αὐτόν] to him, πρός, as Luke 19:5; Luke 19:8; not: in reference to him (Grotius, Rosenmüller, Kuinoel, de Wette, and others), so that Jesus spoke to the disciples or to the people (Paulus). He speaks to Zacchaeus, but not in the second person (τῷ οἴκῳ σου), because what He said was to serve at the same time as a correction for those murmurers (Luke 19:7, comp. on Luke 19:11), and consequently was to have a more general destination. Hence it is also at least unnecessary, with Ewald, to assume an audible soliloquy of Jesus, and to read πρὸς αὑτόν (to himself) (comp. πρὸς ἑαυτόν, Luke 18:11).

καθότι καὶ αὐτὸς κ.τ.λ.] in accordance with the fact that (Luke 1:7; Acts 2:21; in the New Testament used only by Luke) he also (as other Jews, although he is despised as a sinner) is a son of Abraham,—as which he belongs to the saving solicitude of the Messiah. Comp. Luke 13:16. It is not the worthiness (Grotius, Kuinoel, Bleek, and others), but the theocratic claim that is meant. Cyprian, Tertullian, Chrysostom, Maldonatus, and others, including Schenkel, who regard Zacchaeus as a Gentile, are compelled to take υἱὸς Ἀβρ. in an ethical sense (“quamvis genere non sit, tamen fide est,” Maldonatus). But that he was a Gentile is in itself (see also on Luke 19:2), and according to Luke 19:8, not to be supposed, and is not implied in Luke 19:7.

Luke 19:10. γάρ] justifies what is said at Luke 19:9 : with full right do I say that this day is salvation come to this house (the family of this house), etc., for the Messiah has come to seek and to save that which is lost, i.e. those who have incurred eternal ruin. The collective neuter used of persons, as in John 17:2; on the thought, see 1 Timothy 1:15.

ἦλθε] emphatically placed first; for Jesus declares the purpose of His appearance.

ζητῆσαι] might be suggested by the idea of a shepherd (Luke 15:4); still the text contains no closer reference of that kind. Hence it is rather a general expression of the seeking of the love that is solicitous for souls. Comp. 2 Corinthians 12:14. Moreover, comp. on Matthew 18:11.

Luke 19:11. As to the relation of the following parable to Matthew 25:14-30,[231] see on Matthew; the form in Luke is not the original one; see also Weiss in the Jahrb. f. D. Th. 1864, p. 128 ff.

ἀκουόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ταῦτα] But because they heard this (Luke 19:8 ff.), whereby their Messianic anticipations could only be strengthened; see what follows. Not the disciples (Grotius and others), but only those murmurers, Luke 19:7, could be the subject—the single plural-subject which preceded. The scene is this—the people in attendance have accompanied Jesus as far as the entrance into the house (as far as into the forecourt), when they also observe how Zacchaeus joyously welcomes Jesus, and they murmur; whereon Zacchaeus speaks the words, Luke 19:8, and Jesus the rejoinder, Luke 19:9-10.

Both utterances therefore are spoken while they are still at the entrance, so that the murmuring crowd also listens to what is said. The connection is neither disclosed first of all from the contents of the parable (Weizsäcker), nor is it obscure (de Wette, Holtzmann), but it is darkened by the interpreters (see also Sehleiermacher).

προσθείς] adding to, still continuing—a Hebraism, as at Genesis 38:5, Job 29:1, and elsewhere; Winer, p. 416 [E. T. 588]. In pure Greek the expression would run προσθεὶς παραβ. εἶπεν.

εἶπε παραβ.] Comp. Luke 18:9.

ἘΓΓΎς] 150 stadia, Joseph. Bell. iv. 8. 3.

ὅτι παραχρῆμα κ.τ.λ.] ὙΠΈΛΑΒΟΝ, ὍΤΙ ΔΙᾺ ΤΟῦΤΟ ἌΝΕΙΣΙ ΝῦΝ ΕἸς ἹΕΡΟΥΣ., ἽΝΑ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΎΣῌ ἘΝ ΑὐΤῇ, Euthymius Zigabenus.

ἈΝΑΦΑΊΝΕΣΘΑΙ] to come to light.

The people think of the glorious setting up of the kingdom believed in by them. This verse, moreover, does not exclude from the connection of Luke the history of the entrance, Luke 19:29 ff., which Marcion rejected. Comp. Hilgenfeld, Krit. Unters. p. 466.

[231] In affinity with the contents of this parable is the word which Christ, according to Clem. Homil. ii. 51, iii. 50, xviii. 20, and Apelles in Epiphan. Haer. 44. 2, is said to have spoken: γίνεσθε δόκιμοι τραπεζῖται. The wide publication of this saying in Christian antiquity (Clem. Alex., Origen, etc.) makes it probable (in opposition to Lechler, Apost. Zeit. p. 458) that it actually was a word of Christ’s.

Luke 19:12-13. Here is represented a man of noble descent, a nobleman, who journeys into the far country to the governor, who possesses the supremacy, in order to receive, as a vassal, from him regal power over those who have been his fellow-citizens up to that time. This representation is borrowed from the circumstances of governors in Palestine at that time, the kings of which, the Herods, received from Rome their βασιλεία; especially the instance of Archelaus, in respect of the fruitless protest raised against him by the Jews (Joseph. Antt. xvii. 11. 1), is sufficiently similar, reasonably to derive the parabolic narrative, so far as that part of it is concerned, from the remembrance of that transaction.[232]

εἰς χώραν μακράν] a contrast with the ΠΑΡΑΧΡῆΜΑ, Luke 19:11, for Jesus must first go into heaven to the Father, but not consequently removing the Parousia beyond the duration of the lifetime of the generation (Baur, Zeller), since the reckoning at the return has to do with the same servants.

ἑαυτῷ] he wished to receive the kingly dignity for himself, although till then there had been another king.

Luke 19:13. ἑαυτοῦ] ten slaves of his own, of whom therefore he might rightly expect the care of his interest. Comp. on Matthew 25:14.

δέκα μνᾶς] to wit, to each one.[233] The Attic mina = 100 drachmas, i.e. according to Wurm, de ponderum etc. rationibus, p. 266, = from 22 thal. 16 grosch. to 24 thal 3 grosch. Vienna standard money [scil. = from £3, 7s. 8d. to £3, 12s. 4d.]. The small sum astonishes us (even if we should understand thereby Hebrew minae; one מָנֶה = 100 shekels, 1 Kings 10:17; 2 Chronicles 9:16). Compare, on the other hand, the talents, Matthew 25. But in Matt. l.c. the lord transfers to his servants his whole property; here, he has only devoted a definite sum of money to the purpose of putting ten servants to the proof therewith, and the smallness of this amount corresponds to what is so carefully emphasized in our parable, viz. the relation of faithfulness in the least to its great recompense, Luke 19:17, which relation is less regarded in the parable in Matthew; hence in his Gospel (Matthew 25:21; Matthew 25:23) it is only said ἐπὶ ὀλίγα (not as in Luke 19:17, ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ); and the recompense of the individuals is stated indefinitely and in similar terms. The device that the lord took most of his money with him on the journey (Kuinoel) explains nothing; but the assumption of a mistake in the translation (Michaelis), whereby out of minae is made portions (מַנוֹת), is sheer invention.

πραγματ.] follow commercial pursuits, Plut. Sull. vii. 17, Cat. min. 54; Lucian, Philops. 36.

ἐν ᾧ ἔρχομαι] during which (to wit, during this your ΠΡΑΓΜΑΤΕΎΕΣΘΑΙ) I come, i.e. in the midst of which I return. As to ἜΡΧ. in the sense of coming again, which the context affords, see on John 4:16.

[232] Possibly even the locality suggested to Jesus the reference to Archelaus. For in Jericho stood the royal palace which Archelaus had built with great magnificence, Joseph. Antt. xvii. 13. 1.

[233] An essential variation from Matthew 25. The equality of the pecuniary sum which is given to all shows that it was not the (very varied) charismatic endowment for office, but the office itself, that was meant to be typified, whose equal claims and duties, however, were observed by the individuals very differently and with very unequal result.

Luke 19:14-15. The embassy sent forth after him (ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ) goes to the bestower of the kingdom; hence τοῦτον; “fastidiose loquuntur,” Bengel.

οἱ πολῖται αὐτοῦ] his fellow-citizens, Plat. Protag. p. 315 C, and frequently; Genesis 23:11.

οὐ θέλομεν κ.τ.λ.] not instead of θέλομεν τοῦτον οὐ βασιλ. (Markland, ad Lys. I. p. 280 f.; Bornemann), but definite rejection: we will not that this man shall be king. On βασιλεύσαι (Aor.), see Schaefer, App. ad Dem. III. p. 457.

Luke 19:15. In respect of the form γνοῖ (Lachmann, Tischendorf), see on Mark 5:43.

τίς τί] who gained anything, and what he gained? See on Mark 15:24.

διαπραγματ.] not: “negotiando lucratus esset” (Castalio, so usually), but: had undertaken. Comp. Dion. Hal. iii. 72. Passages where διαπραγμ. means perscrutari are not in point here, Plat. Phaed.

Luke 19:16-17. Ἠ μνᾶ σου κ.τ.λ.] “Modeste lucrum acceptum fert herili pecuniae, non industriae suae,” Grotius, comparing 1 Corinthians 15:10. On προσειργάσ., has gained to it, comp. Xen. Hell. iii. 1. 28.

εὖγε (see the critical remarks): well done! bravo! Comp. on Matthew 25:21.

Since thou in the least hast become faithful (actually, not: hast been), be thou ruler over ten cities. Comp. Luke 16:10.

Luke 19:21. As to this apology and its rejection, Luke 19:22 f., see on Matthew 25:24 ff.

αἴρεις κ.τ.λ.] a closer reference to the meaning of ἄνθρ. αὐστηρὸς εἶ, comp. Luke 19:22, hence no longer dependent on ὅτι, thou takest up what thou hast not laid down. This is to be left in the generality of its proverbial form as an expression of the unsparingness of the property of others, which, however, is here conceived of not as dishonest, but in stringent vindication of legitimate claims. The servant pretends that he was afraid for the possible case of the loss of the mina; that the rigorous lord would indemnify himself for it from his property. De Wette and Bleek are wrong in reading: thou claimest back what thou hast not entrusted,—opposed to which is the literal meaning of αἴρεις and its correlation with ἔθηκας. Moreover, Luke 19:23 is not in harmony therewith. Comp. rather the injunction in Josephus, c. Revelation 2 : ὃ μὴ κατέθηκέ τις, οὐκ ἀναιρήσεται, and the law of Solon in Diog. Laert. i. 2. 9 : ἃ μὴ ἔθου, μὴ ἀνέλῃ. The austere character (αὐστηρός) consists in the regardlessness of the inhumanity, in respect of which is experienced the “summum jus, summa injuria.” The epithet σκληρός in Matthew denotes the same thing, but under a different figurative representation (in opposition to Tittmann, Synon. p. 139).

Luke 19:23-24. The question comes in abruptly with καί, laying bare the contradiction between the clauses. See Hartung, Partikell. I. p. 147.

ἐπὶ τράπεζαν (without an article, see the critical remarks), on a banker’s table. The sign of interrogation is to be placed, with Lachmann and Tischendorf, after τράπεζαν. καὶ ἐγὼ (Lachmann, Tischendorf; κἀγώ) κ.τ.λ. is then the result which, in the event hinted at by διὰ τί κ.τ.λ. (ἄν, see Buttmann, Neut. Gr. p. 187 [E. T. 216]), would have followed.

Luke 19:24. τ. παρεστ.] i.e. the satellites, i. 19.

τὰς δέκα μνᾶς] the ten minae mentioned at Luke 19:16, therefore not those which he had from the beginning, but those which he has acquired for himself with the mina that was entrusted to him.

Luke 19:25 interrupts the discourse, since at Luke 19:26 the king (not Jesus) continues, as is proved by Luke 19:27; hence, with Lachmann and Ewald, Luke 19:25 is to be put in parentheses, but not, with Bleek, to be set aside as an interpolation.

Luke 19:26 justifies (even without γάρ, see the critical remarks) the direction contained in Luke 19:24 by a general principle; but the parenthesis of Luke 19:25 contains the reason wherefore the king added this justification.

Luke 19:27. Πλήν] Besides—breaking off. The further arrangement of the king turns away now, that is to say, from the slaves just conferred with, and has to do with those enemies, Luke 19:14, about whom the decision is still pending.

τούτους (see the critical remarks), although referring to those who were absent, describes them as present in the idea of the speaker and the hearers, Wolf, ad Dem. Lept. p. 295; Heindorf, ad Phaed. p. 60; Bornemann, Schol. p. 120.

κατασφάξ.] Slay them; the strong expression is chosen as shadowing forth the completeness of the condemnation to everlasting death at the final judgment. Comp. Xen. Anab. iv. 1. 23; Herod. viii. 127; Soph. O. R. 730; Diod. Sic. xii. 76; 2Ma 5:12.

The doctrine of the parable, according to Luke’s form of it, concerns, on the one hand, the Jewish people that would not receive Jesus as the Messiah (comp. John 1:11); and, on the other, the disciples who were to make application of the official charge entrusted to them (the μνᾶ which each had equally received) zealously as far as possible in the interest of the Messiah until His Parousia. The Messiah thus appears in a twofold relation: to His perverse people and to His servants. The latter are to be called to account at the Parousia, and according to the measure of the actual discharge of official duty committed equally to all, will be exalted to a proportionally high degree of participation in the Messianic dominion (comp. Romans 5:17; Romans 8:17; 1 Corinthians 4:8; 2 Timothy 2:12). This happiness, however, will be so far from falling to the lot of the indolent servant, who in any case is inexcusable,[234] that he was rather to be deprived of the official position of service which he had received, and consequently was to receive no kind of share in the future glory of the kingdom, to which, nevertheless, he also had been appointed. But the former, the antagonistic Jews, are to be dealt with by the returning Messiah with the heaviest punishments.

[234] Ver. 23 serves to mark this inexcusableness in the concrete illustration. The text does not give any further verbal interpretation of the banker’s counter. Lange, L. J. II. 1, p. 414, finds that by the τράπεζα is depicted the church or the congregation to which the office might have been given back.

Luke 19:28. The narrative is wanting in precision, since, according to Luke 19:5 f., this ἐπορεύετο did not take place till the next morning.

ἔμπροσθεν] He went before (“praecedebat,” Vulg.), i.e. according to the context (Luke 19:29), at the head of His disciples. Comp. Mark 10:32. Erasmus, Kypke, Kuinoel, Ewald, and others have: He went forwards, He pursued His journey. This would be the simple ἐπορεύετο (Luke 13:33 and elsewhere) or ἐπορ. εἰς τὸ ἔμπροσθεν.

Luke 19:29-38. See on Matthew 21:1-9; Mark 11:1-10. Luke follows Mark, yet not without something peculiar to himself towards the end. With Fritzsche, ad Marc. p. 794 f., Lachmann, and Tischendorf, we must certainly place the accent thus on the word ἐλαιών, olive-grove, olivetum; not as though, if it were ἐλαιῶν, the article would in itself be necessary (after ἐλαι. ὄρος would have to be repeated), but because Luke, when he designates the mountain as the “Mount of Olives,” constantly has the article (Luke 19:37; Luke 22:39); but besides, in Acts 1:12, where he likewise adds καλούμ., he undoubtedly uses the form ἐλαιών as a name. Hence, at Luke 21:37 also, ἐλαιών is to be written. Comp. Joseph. Antt. vii. 9. 2 : διὰ τοῦ ἐλαιῶνος ὄρους. On the nominative, in respect of a verb of naming, see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 517; Fritzsche, l.c.; Bernhardy, p. 66.

Luke 19:31. ὅτι] because, an answer to διὰ τί.

Luke 19:33. οἱ κύριοι] the actual possessor and those belonging to him.

Luke 19:35. ἑαυτῶν] they use their own upper garments for a riding cushion in their reverence and love for the Lord. So ἑαυτῶν serves for a vivid colouring of the narrative.

Luke 19:37. ἐγγίζοντος … πρὸς τῇ καταβ.] πρός, not of the movement whither (de Wette), but a pregnant union of the direction (ἐγγίζ.) with the where (when He approached at the declivity). See generally, Kühner II. p. 316. In Homer πρός is often found thus with the dative.

ἤρξαντο] for this was only the last station of the Messiah’s entry.

τῶν μαθητῶν] in the wider sense.

εἶδον] for all the Messianic mighty works which they, as companions of Jesus, had seen.

Luke 19:38. ἐν ὀνόμ. κ.] belongs to ἐρχόμ., according to a frequent transposition. See Bornemann, Schol. p. 121 f.; Kühner, ad Xen. Anab. iv. 2. 18. Comp. Luke 23:48.

εἰρήνη κ.τ.λ.] The thought that “with God is salvation (which He is now purposing to communicate by means of the Messiah), and He is praised (for it) in the height (by the angels, comp. Luke 2:14),” is expressed in a hymnic form by the parallelism: “Salvation is in the heaven, and glory in the highest.” Luke gives the acclamation, according to a tradition, which had avoided the Hebrew Hosanna.

Luke 19:39 ff. Peculiar to Luke, and as far as Luke 19:44 taken from tradition.

ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου] from out of the multitude, among whom they found themselves.

ἐπιτίμησον] rebuke (this crying).

σιωπήσουσιν] (see the critical remarks) indicative after ἐάν, so that the meaning of ἄν clings wholly to the conditioning particle, and does not affect the verb: if these become silent. See Klotz, ad Devar. p. 474.

οἱ λίθοι κράξ.] The sense is: this outbreak of the divine praise is not to be restrained. Comp. Habakkuk 2:11; Servius, ad Virg. Ecl. v. 28; Chagiga, f. 16. 1 : “Ne dicas: quis testabitur contra me? Lapides domus ejus … testabuntur contra eum.” See also the passages in Wetstein.

Luke 19:41. ἐπʼ αὐτήν] over it, comp. Luke 23:28. The direction of the weeping to its object; in the classical writers with a simple accusative, also with ἐπί τινι (Revelation 18:11). Observe, further, the audible weeping of Jesus at the view of Jerusalem, not the silent δακρύειν as at the grave of Lazarus, John 11:35.

εἰ ἔγνως κ.τ.λ.] if only thou hadst known and, indeed, in this thy day, what belongs to thy salvation! Pathetic aposiopesis, and consequently an expression of the fruitlessness of the wish; comp. on Luke 22:42, and on John 6:62; Buttmann, Neut. Gr. p. 339 [E. T. 396]. Euthymius Zigabenus aptly says: εἰώθασι γὰρ οἱ κλαίοντες ἐπικόπτεσθαι τοὺς λόγους ὑπὸ τῆς τοῦ πάθους σφοδρότητος. What served for the salvation of Jerusalem was the reception of Jesus as the Messiah.

καὶ σύ] as my μαθηταί.

καί γε] et quidem. See on Acts 2:18.

ἐν τῇ ἡμ. σου] i.e. in this day given to thee for thy deliverance. Comp. τὸν καιρὸν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς σου, Luke 19:44; Psalm 118:24.

νῦν δέ] as, however, now the circumstances actually are, but thus; often thus since Homer after conditional clauses (John 8:40; 1 Corinthians 12:20).

ἐκρύβη] by divine decree; see John 12:37 ff.; Romans 11:7 f.

Luke 19:43. ὅτι ἥξουσιν κ.τ.λ.] ὅτι on does not introduce what has been concealed (this is rather τὰ πρὸς εἰρήνην σου), but it brings a prophetic confirmation of the νῦν δὲ κ.τ.λ. that has just been said: for there shall come (not tarry), etc. The certainty of this miserable future proves that what serves for thy salvation has become veiled from thine eyes. Following Lachmann, only a comma is to be placed before ὅτι. In what follows, observe the solemn five-fold repetition of καί in the affecting unperiodic discourse. The first takes the place of ὅτε (Luke 17:22, Luke 23:44; Romans 2:16; John 4:21; and see on Mark 15:25).

χάρακα] masculine: a palisaded wall, Polyb. i. 29. 3, viii. 34. 3, x. 39. 1, xviii. 1. 1. On χάρακα βάλλειν, see Plut. Aem. P. 17, Marcell. 18. As a feminine, it is limited by the grammarians to the signification of vine-prop, but see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 61 f.

σοι] Comp. Xen. Mem. ii. 1. 14 : ταῖς πόλεσιν ἐρύματα περιβάλλονται. According to Herod. i. 163, and elsewhere, σέ might also be used. In the Jewish war the rampart was actually erected (hence Schenkel considers this point as vaticinium ex eventu), burnt up by the Jews, and replaced by Titus with a wall. See Joseph. v. 6. 2, v. 12. 2 ff.

συνέξουσι] keep close, see on Php 1:23.

Luke 19:44. ἐδαφιοῦσί σε] they shall level thee (Polyb. vi. 33. 6), i.e. make thee like to the ground. Comp. Amos 9:14; also κατασκάπτειν εἰς ἔδαφος, Thuc. iv. 109. 1. Comp. 3:68. 2. The following κ. τὰ τέκνα σ. ἐν σοί is added by a zeugma, so that now ἐδαφίζω has the signification, frequent in the LXX., to dash on the ground (Hosea 14:1; Nahum 3:10; Psalm 137:9). The children of the city are its inhabitants, Matthew 23:37; Luke 13:34; Galatians 4:25. The city is figuratively regarded as a mother, hence τὰ τέκνα are not to be understood (Kuinoel) of the actual children (infantes).

τὸν καιρ. τ. ἐπισκ. σου] the time of the solicitude concerning thee, when God interested Himself for thee by means of the offer of the Messianic salvation through me. Comp. 1 Peter 2:12; Proverbs 29:13; Job 29:4; Wis 2:10; Wis 3:7; Sir 18:19; 3Ma 5:42, and thereon Grimm, ἐπισκοπή in itself is a vox media, and in the LXX. and Apocrypha (Wis 14:11; Wis 19:15) is frequently also used when God concerns Himself with any one in punishment. The word does not occur in the classical writers.

Luke 19:45-46. See on Matthew 21:12 f.; Mark 11:15-17. Luke proceeds by brief extracts, and, moreover, gives the saying in Isaiah 56:7 not as Mark gives it, but in the abbreviated form of Matthew.

ἤρξατο] He began therewith His Messianic ministry in the temple. Schleiermacher erroneously regards Luke 19:45-46 as the concluding formula of the narrative of the journey.

Luke 19:47-48. Καὶ οἱ πρῶτοι τ. λαοῦ] The worldly aristocracy, yet with special emphasis.

ἐξεκρέματο κ.τ.λ.] the people hung upon Him as they hearkened to Him. “Populi assiduitas aditum hostibus obstruebat,” Bengel. On ἐκκρέμαμαι with a genitive, comp. Plut. Mark 12, and the passages in Wetstein. With ἐκ, Genesis 44:30; Plat. Leg. v. p. 731 E.