98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑106Ut sup. s. 237.↑107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑117Olshausen, s. 509.↑118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑130S. 93.↑131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑132Wetstein, in loc.↑133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑1431, s. 310 f.↑144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑182See the passage last cited.↑183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑1841 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑187Ut sup. s. 196.↑188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑189Disc. 3.↑190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑195Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑106Ut sup. s. 237.↑107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑117Olshausen, s. 509.↑118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑130S. 93.↑131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑132Wetstein, in loc.↑133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑1431, s. 310 f.↑144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑182See the passage last cited.↑183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑1841 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑187Ut sup. s. 196.↑188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑189Disc. 3.↑190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑195Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑106Ut sup. s. 237.↑107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑117Olshausen, s. 509.↑118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑130S. 93.↑131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑132Wetstein, in loc.↑133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑1431, s. 310 f.↑144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑182See the passage last cited.↑183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑1841 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑187Ut sup. s. 196.↑188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑189Disc. 3.↑190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑195Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑106Ut sup. s. 237.↑107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑117Olshausen, s. 509.↑118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑130S. 93.↑131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑132Wetstein, in loc.↑133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑1431, s. 310 f.↑144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑182See the passage last cited.↑183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑1841 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑187Ut sup. s. 196.↑188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑189Disc. 3.↑190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑195Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑106Ut sup. s. 237.↑107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑117Olshausen, s. 509.↑118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑130S. 93.↑131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑132Wetstein, in loc.↑133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑1431, s. 310 f.↑144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑182See the passage last cited.↑183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑1841 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑187Ut sup. s. 196.↑188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑189Disc. 3.↑190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑195Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑
98Paulus, L. J. 1, b, s. 68.↑
99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑
99Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 215.↑
100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑
100Vid. Winer, Realw., Art. Blinde.↑
101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑
101Gratz, Comm z. Matth. 2, s. 323.↑
102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑
102Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, a, s. 44.↑
103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑
103Schulz, Anmerkungen zu Michaelis, 2, s. 105.↑
104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑
104Sieffert, ut sup. s.104.↑
105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑
105Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 345.↑
106Ut sup. s. 237.↑
106Ut sup. s. 237.↑
107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑
107Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 249.↑
108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑
108Natürl. Gesch. des Propheten von Naz. 2, s. 216.↑
109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑
109Vid. vol. i. p. 81, note.↑
110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑
110Elsewhere also we find proof that in those times the power of effecting miraculous cures, especially of blindness, was commonly ascribed to men who were regarded as favourites of the Deity. Thus Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, and Suetonius, Vespas. vii. tell us, that in Alexandria a blind man applied to Vespasian, shortly after he was made emperor, alleging that he did so by the direction of the god Serapis, with the entreaty that he would cure him of his blindness by wetting his eyes with his spittle. Vespasian complied, and the result was that the blind man immediately had his sight restored. As Tacitus attests the truth of this story in a remarkable manner, Paulus is probably not wrong in regarding the affair as the contrivance of adulatory priests, who to procure for the emperor the fame of a miracle-worker, and by this means to secure his favour on behalf of their god, by whose counsel the event was occasioned, hired a man to simulate blindness. Ex. Handb. 2, s. 56 f. However this may be, we see from the narrative what was expected, even beyond the limits of Palestine, of a man who, as Tacitus here expresses himself concerning Vespasian, enjoyedfavor e cœlisand aninclinatio numinum.↑
111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑
111These are nearly the words of Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 312, 391.↑
112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑
112De Wette, Beitrag zur Charakteristik des Evangelisten Markus, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1, 4, 789 ff. Comp. Köster, Immanuel, f. 72. On the other hand: comp. De Wette’s exeg. Handb. 1, 2, s. 148 f.↑
113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑
113Pliny, H. N. xxviii. 7, and other passages in Wetstein.↑
114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑
114Paulus, ut sup. s. 312 f. 392 ff.; Natürliche Geschichte, 3, s. 31 ff. 216 f.; Köster, Immanuel, s. 188 ff.↑
115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑
115For the former explanation, Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s, 390 f.; for the latter, Olshausen, b, Comm. 1. s. 510.↑
116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑
116Kuinöl, in Marc., p. 110.↑
117Olshausen, s. 509.↑
117Olshausen, s. 509.↑
118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑
118Comp. De Wette, Kritik der Mosaischen Geschichte, s. 36 f.↑
119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑
119Fritzsche, Comm. in Marc., p. xliii.↑
120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑
120Vid. ap. Wetstein and Lightfoot,John ix. 6.↑
121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑
121Thus Fritzsche, after Euthymius, in Marc., p. 304.↑
122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑
122The former is the supposition of Kuinöl, the latter of Schott.↑
123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑
123Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 1, s. 391, Anm. 1.↑
124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑
124Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 472.↑
125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑
125Natürliche Gesch. 3, s. 215.↑
126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑
126Vid. Tholuck and Lücke, in loc.↑
127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑
127Vid. Paulus and Lücke, in loc.↑
128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑
128Thus Euthymius and Paulus, in loc.↑
129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑
129B. Comm. 2, s. 230, where, however, he refers theἀπεσταλμένοςto the outflow of the spirit proceeding from God.↑
130S. 93.↑
130S. 93.↑
131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑
131Köster, Immanuel, s. 79; Bretschneider, Probab., s. 122.↑
132Wetstein, in loc.↑
132Wetstein, in loc.↑
133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑
133Nedarim f. xli. 1. (Schöttgen, 1, p. 93):Dixit R. Chija fil. Abba: nullus ægrotus a morbo suo sanatur, donec ipsi omnia peccata remissa sint.↑
134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑
134Hase, L. J. § 73. Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 335.↑
135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑
135Sanhedr. f. xci. 2, and Bereschith Rabba f. xxxviii. 1. (Lightfoot, p. 1050):Antonius interrogavit Rabbi (Judam): a quonam tempore incipit malus affectus prævalere in homine? an a tempore formationis ejus (in utero), an a tempore processionis ejus (ex utero)? Dicit ei Rabbi: a tempore formationis ejus.↑
136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑
136Paulus Comm. 4, s. 264; Lücke, 2, s. 22.↑
137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑
137This is done by Tholuck, in loc.↑
138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑
138See the examples in Wetstein, N. T. 1, s. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis.↑
139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑
139Comp. Winer, Realw., and Fritzsche, in Matt. p. 194.↑
140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑
140Winer, ut sup. Art. Dach.↑
141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑
141Lightfoot, p. 601.↑
142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑
142Woolston, Disc. 4.↑
1431, s. 310 f.↑
1431, s. 310 f.↑
144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑
144Köster, Immanuel, s. 166, Anm. 66.↑
145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑
145This appears to be the meaning of Paulus, L. J. 1, a, s. 238. Otherwise exeg. Handb.1, b, s. 505.↑
146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑
146Thus Lightfoot, Kuinöl, Olshausen, in loc.↑
147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑
147Vid. Fritzsche, in Marc., p. 52.↑
148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑
148Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 498, 501.↑
149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑
149Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. Paulus, s. 502, again takes an obvious fable in Livy ii. 36 for a history, capable of a natural explanation.↑
150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑
150Paulus, ut sup. s. 501.↑
151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑
151Ueber den Zweck der evang. Geschichte und der Briefe Joh., s. 351 f.↑
152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑
152Schulz, ut sup. s. 317; Olshausen, 1, s. 322.↑
153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑
153Exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f.; bibl. Comm. 1, s. 324 f.; comp. Köster, Immanuel, s. 201 ff.↑
154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑
154Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 524 f. 530. L. J. 1, a, s. 244 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 204 ff.; Köster, ut sup.↑
155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑
155Vid. Evangelium infantiæ arabicum, ap. Fabricius and Thilo.↑
156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑
156See the observations of Paulus, Lücke, Tholuck, and Olshausen, in loc.↑
157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑
157Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 92.↑
158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑
158Augustin, de consens. evang. i. 20; Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 709; Köster, Immanuel, s. 63.↑
159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑
159Ueber den Zweck Jesu, u. s. f., s. 351.↑
160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑
160Vid. Lücke, 1, s. 552.↑
161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑
161Fritzsche, in Matth. p. 310:discrepat autem Lucas ita a Matthæi narratione, ut centurionem non ipsum venisse ad Jesum,sed per legatos cum eo egisse tradat; quibus dissidentibus pacem obtrudere, boni nego interpretis esse.↑
162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑
162Schleiermacher, ut sup. s. 92 f.↑
163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑
163Kuinöl, in Matt., p. 221 f.↑
164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑
164Tholuck, in loc.; Hase § 68, Anm. 2.↑
165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑
165Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 253 f.; Venturini, 2, s. 140 ff.; comp. Hase, § 68.↑
166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑
166Lücke, 1, s. 550 f.↑
167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑
167Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, b, s. 710 f.; Natürliche Geschichte, 2,s. 285 ff.↑
168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑
168Clem. homil. ix. 21; Fritzsche, in Matth., 313.↑
169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑
169Wetstein, N. T. 1, p. 349; comp. Olshausen, in loc.↑
170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑
170Köster, Immanuel, s. 195, Anm.↑
171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑
171Lücke, 1, s. 550.↑
172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑
172Bibl. Comm. 1, s. 268.↑
173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑
173Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 80 f.↑
174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑
174Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung, u. s. f., s. 50.↑
175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑
175Schleiermacher, ut sup.↑
176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑
176Exeg. Handb. 2, s. 48 ff.↑
177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑
177Natürliche Geschichte, 2, s. 421.↑
178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑
178Winer, b. Realw. 1, s. 796.↑
179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑
179Paulus, ut sup. s. 49, 54; Köster, Immanuel, s. 185 f.↑
180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑
180Ut sup. s. 83, ex Tract. Schabbat.↑
181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑
181Schabbat, f. 12, ap. Schöttgen, i. p. 123.↑
182See the passage last cited.↑
182See the passage last cited.↑
183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑
183Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 427; in Mar., p. 79.↑
1841 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.
184
1 Kings xiii. 4, LXX:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐξηράνθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ.6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.Matth. xii. 10:καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἐ͂ν τὴν χεῖρα ἔχων ξηράν(Mark,ἐξηραμμένην.)13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.
6:καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὴν χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγένετο καθὼς τὸ πρότερον.
13:τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρωπῳ· ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα σου· καὶ ἐξέτεινε· καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη.
185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑
185Tacit. Hist. iv. 81.↑
186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑
186Paulus, exeg. Handb. 2, s. 341 f.↑
187Ut sup. s. 196.↑
187Ut sup. s. 196.↑
188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑
188Winer (bibl. Realw. 1, s. 796) says: We should be contented to refrain from seeking a natural explanationin individual cases(of the cures of Jesus), and ever bear in mind that the banishment of the miraculous out of the agency of Jesus can never be effectedso long as the gospels are regarded historically.↑
189Disc. 3.↑
189Disc. 3.↑
190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑
190Paulus, Comm. 4, s. 263 ff. L. J. 1, a, s. 298.↑
191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑
191Vid. Lücke and Tholuck, in loc.↑
192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑
192Comp. with Comm. 4, s. 290, his Leben Jesu, 1, a, s. 298.↑
193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑
193Bretschneider, Probab., s. 69.↑
194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑
194As by Hase, L. J. § 92.↑
195Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
195
Mark ii. 9: (τί ἐστιν, εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν——)ἔγειραι, καὶ ἆρόν σου τὸν κράββατον καὶ περιπάτει;11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.John v. 8:ἔγειραι, ἆρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει.12:καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, καὶ ὤρας τὸν κράββατον ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον πάντων.9:καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἦρε τὸν κράββατον αὑτοῦ καὶ περιεπάτει.
11:—ἔγειρα καὶἆροντὸν κράββατόν σου καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου.