Lectionary Calendar
Thursday, July 17th, 2025
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
video advertismenet
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
Attention!
StudyLight.org has pledged to help build churches in Uganda. Help us with that pledge and support pastors in the heart of Africa.
Click here to join the effort!
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Commentaries
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Meyer's Commentary
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Mark 13". Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. https://studylight.org/commentaries/eng/hmc/mark-13.html. 1832.
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Mark 13". Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. https://studylight.org/
Whole Bible (45)New Testament (18)Gospels Only (6)Individual Books (13)
Introduction
CHAPTER 13
Mark 13:2 . á¼Î ÎÎΡÎÎÎÎÏ ] IS, WITH TISCH., TO BE DELETED, AS AT Mark 11:33 , FOLLOWING B L × , MIN. VSS.
Mark 13:2 . ὯÎÎ IS ADOPTED BEFORE ÎÎÎÎÏ BY GRIESB. FRITZSCHE, SCHOLZ, LACHM., IN ACCORDANCE DOUBTLESS WITH B D G L U Î × , MIN. VSS., BUT IT IS AN ADDITION FROM Matthew 24:2 . IT IS GENUINE IN MATTHEW ALONE, WHERE, MOREOVER, IT IS NOT WANTING IN ANY OF THE CODICES.
Mark 13:4 . ÎἸΠΠ] B D L × , MIN. HAVE ÎἸΠÎÎ . SO FRITZSCHE, LACHM. TISCH. THIS RARER FORM IS TO BE ADOPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SO CONSIDERABLE TESTIMONY; ÎἸΠΠIS FROM MATTHEW.
WITH TISCH., FOLLOWING B L × , WE MUST WRITE ΤÎῦΤΠΣΥÎΤÎÎ . Î ÎÎΤΠ; DIFFERENT ATTEMPTS TO RECTIFY THE ORDER PRODUCED THE VARIATIONS.
Mark 13:8 . BEFORE THE SECOND á¼Î£ÎÎΤÎÎ WE MUST, WITH TISCH., DELETE ÎÎÎ , IN ACCORDANCE WITH B L × ** .
ÎÎῠΤÎΡÎΧÎÎ ] SUSPECTED BY GRIESB., STRUCK OUT BY LACHM. AND TISCH., IN ACCORDANCE WITH B D L × , COPT. AETH. ERP. VULG. IT. VICT. BUT WHEREFORE AND WHENCE WAS IT TO HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED? ON THE OTHER HAND, IT WAS VERY EASILY LOST IN THE FOLLOWING á¼Î¡Î§ÎÎ .
Mark 13:9 . á¼Î¡Î§ÎÎ ] B D K L U Î × , MIN. VSS. VULG. IT. ALSO HAVE á¼Î¡Î§Î , WHICH IS COMMENDED BY GRIESB., ADOPTED BY FRITZSCHE, SCHOLZ, LACHM. TISCH.; FROM Matthew 24:8 .
Mark 13:11 . INSTEAD OF á¼ÎΩΣÎÎ ELZ. HAS á¼ÎÎÎΩΣÎÎ , IN OPPOSITION TO DECISIVE EVIDENCE.
ÎÎÎá¿ ÎÎÎÎΤᾶΤΠ] IS WANTING IN B D L × , MIN. COPT. AETH. AR. P. ERP. VULG. IT. VIGIL. CONDEMNED BY GRIESB., BRACKETED BY LACHM., DELETED BY TISCH. BUT THE HOMOIOTELEUTON THE MORE EASILY OCCASIONED THE OMISSION OF THE WORDS, SINCE THEY FOLLOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER ΤΠÎÎÎÎΣÎΤΠ. Luke 21:14 , MOREOVER, TESTIFIES IN FAVOUR OF THEIR GENUINENESS.
Mark 13:14 . AFTER á¼Î¡ÎÎÎΣÎÎ©Ï ELZ. SCHOLZ, FRITZSCHE (LACHM. IN BRACKETS) HAVE: ΤῸ ῬÎÎá¿Î á½Î Ὸ ÎÎÎÎá¿Î ΤÎῦ ΠΡÎΦÎΤÎÎ¥ , WHICH WORDS ARE NOT FOUND IN B D L × , COPT. ARM. IT. VULG. SAX. AUG. THEY ARE FROM MATTHEW.
á¼Î£Î¤ÎÏ ] LACHM. HAS á¼Î£Î¤ÎÎÎÏ , FOLLOWING D 28; TISCH. HAS á¼Î£Î¤ÎÎÎΤΠ, FOLLOWING B L × . FRITZSCHE: á¼Î£Î¤ÎÏ , ACCORDING TO A E F G H V Î , MIN. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE RECEPTA HAS PREPONDERANT EVIDENCE AGAINST IT; IT IS FROM Matthew 24:15 . OF THE OTHER READINGS á¼Î£Î¤ÎÎÎÏ IS TO BE ADOPTED, BECAUSE B L × ALSO TESTIFY IN ITS FAVOUR BY á¼Î£Î¤ÎÎÎΤΠ; [153] WHILE á¼Î£Î¤ÎÏ LIKEWISE BETRAYS ITS ORIGIN FROM MATTHEW (VAR.; SEE THE CRITICAL REMARKS ON Matthew 24:15 ).
Mark 13:16 . ὪΠ] IS WANTING IN B D L Î Ö° , MIN. LACHM. TISCH. BUT HOW EASILY IT DROPT OUT AFTER á¼ÎΡÎÎ ! THE MORE EASILY, BECAUSE ὪΠSTOOD ALSO IN Mark 13:15 .
Mark 13:18 . Ἡ ΦΥÎá¿ á½Îá¿¶Î ] IS WANTING IN B D L Î Ö° * MIN. ARM. VULG. IT., AND IN OTHER WITNESSES IS REPRESENTED BY ΤÎῦΤΠ. CONDEMNED BY GRIESB. AND RINCK, DELETED BY FRITZSCHE, LACHM. TISCH. RIGHTLY SO; IT IS FROM Matthew 24:20 , FROM WHICH PLACE ALSO CODD. AND VSS. HAVE AFTER ΧÎÎÎá¿¶ÎÎÏ ADDED: ÎÎÎῠΣÎÎÎÎΤῼ , OR ÎÎÎῠΣÎÎÎÎΤÎÎ¥ , OR Ἢ ΣÎÎÎÎΤÎÎ¥ , AND THE LIKE.
Mark 13:19 . á¼¯Ï ] LACHM. TISCH. HAVE á¼Î , FOLLOWING B C * L Ö° , 28. A CORRECTION. THE OMISSION OF á¼¯Ï á¼ÎΤ . á½ ÎÎÎÏ IN D 27, ARM. CODD. IT. IS EXPLAINED BY THE SUPERFLUOUSNESS OF THE WORDS.
Mark 13:21 . THE OMISSION OF Ἤ , WHICH GRIESB., FOLLOWING MILL, COMMENDED, AND FRITZSCHE AND TISCH. HAVE CARRIED OUT, IS TOO WEAKLY ATTESTED. IN ITSELF IT MIGHT AS WELL HAVE BEEN ADDED FROM MATTHEW AS OMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LUKE.
INSTEAD OF Î ÎΣΤÎÎÎΤΠELZ. HAS Î ÎΣΤÎÎΣÎΤΠ, IN OPPOSITION TO PREPONDERANT EVIDENCE; IT IS FROM Matthew 24:23 .
Mark 13:22 . ALTHOUGH ONLY ON THE EVIDENCE OF D, MIN. CODD. IT., ΨÎÎ¥ÎÎΧΡÎΣΤÎÎ ÎÎÎ IS TO BE DELETED, AND Î ÎÎÎΣÎΥΣÎÎ IS TO BE WRITTEN INSTEAD OF ÎÎΣÎΥΣΠ. MOREOVER (WITH TISCH.), ÎÎÎ IS TO BE OMITTED BEFORE ΤÎá¿ªÏ á¼ÎÎ . (B D Ö° ). THE RECEPTA IS A FILLING UP FROM MATTHEW.
Mark 13:23 . ἸÎÎῦ ] IS WANTING IN B L 28, COPT AETH. VERC. BRACKETED BY LACHM., DELETED BY TISCH. AN ADDITION FROM MATTHEW.
Mark 13:25 . ΤÎῦ Îá½Î¡ÎÎÎῦ á¼Î£ÎÎΤÎÎ ] A B C Ö° , MIN. VSS. HAVE á¼Î£ÎÎΤÎÎ á¼Î ΤÎῦ Îá½Î¡ÎÎÎῦ . SO FRITZSCHE, LACHM. TISCH. INSTEAD OF á¼ÎÎ ÎΠΤ . B C D L Ö° , MIN. CODD. IT. HAVE Î ÎΠΤÎÎΤÎÏ (SO FRITZSCHE, LACHM. TISCH.). THUS THE MOST IMPORTANT CODICES ARE AGAINST THE RECEPTA (D HAS Îá¼¹ á¼Î ΤÎῦ Îá½Î¡ÎÎÎῦ á¼Î£ÎÎΤÎÎ Î ÎΠΤÎÎΤÎÏ ), IN PLACE OF WHICH THE BEST ATTESTED OF THESE READINGS ARE TO BE ADOPTED. INTERNAL GROUNDS ARE WANTING; BUT IF IT HAD BEEN ALTERED FROM MATTHEW, á¼Î Î WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUND INSTEAD OF á¼Î .
Mark 13:27 . Îá½Î¤Îῦ ] AFTER á¼ÎÎÎÎ . IS WANTING IN B D L, COPT. CANT. VERC. VIND. CORB. BRACKETED BY LACHM., DELETED BY TISCH.; IT IS FROM MATTHEW.
Mark 13:28 . THE VERBAL ORDER ἬÎÎ á½ ÎÎÎÎÎÏ Îá½Î¤á¿Ï (FRITZSCHE, LACHM.) HAS PREPONDERATING EVIDENCE, BUT IT IS FROM MATTHEW. THE MANIFOLD TRANSPOSITIONS IN THE CODICES WOULD HAVE NO MOTIVE, IF THE READING OF LACHM. HAD BEEN THE ORIGINAL, AS IN THE CASE OF MATTHEW NO VARIATION IS FOUND.
ÎÎÎÎΣÎÎΤΠ] A B ** D L Î , MIN. HAVE ÎÎÎÎΣÎÎΤÎÎ , WHICH IS APPROVED BY SCHULZ AND ADOPTED BY FRITZSCHE AND TISCH. THE RECEPTA IS FROM THE PARALLELS.
Mark 13:31 . INSTEAD OF Î ÎΡÎÎÎÎΣÎΤÎÎ , ELZ. LACHM. TISCH. HAVE Î ÎΡÎÎÎÎΣÎÎΤÎÎ . THE PLURAL (B D K U Î Ö° ) IS TO BE MAINTAINED HERE AND AT Luke 21:33 ; THE REMEMBRANCE OF THE WELL-KNOWN SAYING FROM MATTH. SUGGESTED Î ÎΡÎÎÎÎΣÎΤÎÎ IN THE SINGULAR . MOREOVER, IT TELLS IN FAVOUR OF THE PLURAL , THAT B L Ö° , MIN. (TISCH.) HAVE Î ÎΡÎÎÎÎΣÎÎΤÎÎ AGAIN AFTERWARDS INSTEAD OF Î ÎΡÎÎÎΩΣΠ, ALTHOUGH THIS IS A MECHANICAL REPETITION.
Mark 13:32 . INSTEAD OF Ἤ ELZ. HAS ÎÎÎ , IN OPPOSITION TO DECISIVE EVIDENCE.
Mark 13:33 . ÎÎΠΠΡÎΣÎÎΧÎΣÎÎ ] IS WANTING IN B D 122, CANT. VERC. COLB. TOLET. DELETED BY LACHM. RIGHTLY; AN ADDITION THAT EASILY OCCURRED (COMP. Matthew 24:41 AND THE PARALLELS).
Mark 13:34 . ÎÎÎ IS TO BE DELETED BEFORE á¼ÎÎΣΤῼ (WITH LACHM. AND TISCH.), IN CONFORMITY WITH B C * D L Ö° , MIN. CODD. IT.
Mark 13:37 . BETWEEN á¼ IN ELZ. SCHOLZ, AND á½ WHICH GRIESB. HAS APPROVED, AND FRITZSCHE, LACHM. HAVE ADOPTED, THE EVIDENCE IS VERY MUCH DIVIDED. BUT á½ IS AN UNNECESSARY EMENDATION, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOW PREFERRED BY TISCH. (B C Ö° , ETC.). D, CODD. IT. HAVE á¼ÎῺ Îá¿ Î . á½Î . ÎΡÎÎ .
[153] The masculine was introduced by the reference, frequent in the Fathers, to the statue ( Ïὸν á¼Î½Î´ÏιάνÏα ) of the conqueror.
Verses 1-8
Mark 13:1-8 . See on Matthew 24:1-8 . Comp. Luke 21:5-11 . Mark has preserved the introduction in its original historical form. But Matthew has the discourse itself , although more artistically elaborated, in its greatest completeness from the collection of Logia and with some use of Mark; and that down to the consummation of the last judgment. [154]
Î ÎΤÎÎ Îá¿ ÎÎÎÎÎ ] qualcs lapides ! ᾠκοδομήθη á½ Î½Î±á½¸Ï á¼Îº λίθÏν μὲν Î»ÎµÏ Îºá¿¶Î½ Ïε καὶ καÏÏεÏῶν , Ïὸ μÎÎ³ÎµÎ¸Î¿Ï á¼ÎºÎ¬ÏÏÏν ÏεÏá½¶ ÏÎνÏε καὶ εἴκοÏι ÏηÏῶν á¼Ïá½¶ μá¿ÎºÎ¿Ï , á½ÎºÏá½¼ δὲ á½ÏÎ¿Ï , εá½ÏÎ¿Ï Î´á½² ÏεÏá½¶ δÏδεκα , Joseph. Antt. xv. 11. 3. See Ottii Spicileg. p. 175. Who uttered the exclamation? (Was it Peter? or Andrew?) Probably Mark himself did not know.
On the ÏοÏαÏÏÏ belonging to later usage, see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 56 f.; Fritzsche, p. 554 f.
Mark 13:2 . á½Ï Îá½ Îá¿ ÎÎΤÎÎ . ] for Îá½ ÎÎ in the relative clause, see Winer, p. 450 [E. T. 635 f.] The conception here is: there shall certainly be no stone left upon the other, which (in the further course of the destruction) would be secure from being thrown down. Comp. Luke 18:30 .
Mark 13:3 . As previously, Mark here also relates more vividly ( ÎÎΤÎÎÎÎΤΠΤÎῦ á¼¹ÎΡÎῦ ) and more accurately ( Î ÎΤΡÎÏ Î . Τ . Î . ) than Matthew. According to de Wette (comp. Saunier, p. 132; Strauss, Baur), Mark is induced to the latter statement by the ÎÎΤʼ ἸÎÎÎÎ of Matthew a specimen of the great injustice which is done to Mark as an alleged compiler.
ÎἸΠÎÎ ] Thus, and not ÎἾΠÎÎ , is this imperative (which is also current among the Attic writers; see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 348) to be accented in the N. T. See Winer, p. 49 [E. T. 58].
Ïὸ Ïημεá¿Î¿Î½ ] scil. á¼Î£Î¤ÎÎ : what will be the fore-token (which appears), when all this destruction is to enter on its fulfilment?
ΤÎῦΤΠΣΥÎΤÎÎ . Î ÎÎΤΠ] (see the critical remarks) applies not to the buildings of the temple (Fritzsche, who takes ÏÏ Î½Ïελεá¿Ïθαι as simul exscindi , comp. Beza), but, just like ΤÎῦΤΠ, to the destruction announced at Mark 13:2 . To explain it of “ the whole world ” (as ΤÎῦΤΠis well known to be so used by the philosophers, Bernhardy, p. 280) or of “ all things of the Parousia ” (Lange), is a forced course at variance with the context, occasioned by Matthew 24:3 [155] (in opposition to Grotius, Bengel). Moreover, the state of the case is here climactic; hence, while previously there stood merely ÏαῦÏα , now ÏάνÏα is added; previously: á¼ÏÏαι , now ÏÏ Î½Ïελεá¿Ïθαι ( be consummated ).
Mark 13:5 . Jesus now begins His detailed explanation as to the matter ( ἤÏξαÏο ).
Mark 13:7 . Ïὸ ÏÎÎ»Î¿Ï ] the end of the tribulation (see Mark 13:9 ), not the end of the world (so even Dorner, Lange, Bleek), which only sets in after the end of the tribulation. See on Matthew 24:6 .
Mark 13:8 . καὶ á¼ÏονÏαι ⦠καὶ á¼ÏονÏαι ] solemnly.
καὶ ÏαÏαÏαί ] Famines and (therewith connected) disturbances , not exactly revolts (Griesbach), which the context does not suggest, but more general. Plat. Legg. ix. p. 861 A: ÏαÏαÏή Ïε καὶ á¼Î¾Ï μÏÏνία . Theaet. p. 168 A: ÏÎ±Ï . καὶ á¼ÏοÏία , Alc. ii. p. 146, 15 : ÏÎ±Ï , Ïε καὶ á¼Î½Î¿Î¼Î¯Î± , 2Ma 13:16 . Comp. ÏάÏαÏÎ¿Ï , Acts 12:18 ; Acts 19:23 .
[154] Weizsäcker, p. 125, conjectures from Barnabas 4 ( × ), where a saying of Enoch is quoted about the shortening ( ÏÏ Î½ÏÎÏμηκεν ) of the days of the final offence (comp. ver. 20; Matthew 24:22 ), that the properly apocalyptic elements of the discourse as to the future are of Jewish origin, from an Apocalypse of Enoch; but the conjecture rests on much too bold and hasty an inference, hazarded as it is on a single thought, which Jesus Himself might very fairly share with the Jewish consciousness in general.
[155] Nevertheless, between the passage before us and Matt. l.c. there is no essential diversity, since the disciples conceived of the destruction of Jerusalem as immediately preceding the Parousia. See on Matthew 24:3 . Comp. also Dorner, de orat. Chr. eschatologica , p. 45.
Verses 9-13
Mark 13:9-13 . See on Matthew 24:9 ; Matthew 14:10-13 ; Luke 21:12-18 . Mark has here interwoven some things from the discourse which is found at Matthew 10:17-22 .
á¼ÏÏαί ] prefixed with emphasis: beginnings of sorrows (comp. Ïὸ ÏÎÎ»Î¿Ï , Mark 13:7 ) are these.
βλÎÏεÏε δὲ κ . Ï . λ .] but look ye (ye on your part, in the midst of these sorrows that surround you) to yourselves , how your own conduct must be. Comp. on βλÎÏ . á¼Î±Ï Ï ., 2 John 1:8 ; Galatians 6:1 .
ÏÏ Î½ÎδÏια ] judicial assemblies , as Matthew 10:17 .
καὶ Îµá¼°Ï ÏÏ Î½Î±Î³Ïγ .] attaches itself, as Îµá¼°Ï ÏÏ Î½ÎδÏια precedes, most naturally to this (Luther, Castalio, Erasmus, Beza, Calovius, Elz., Lachmann), so that with δαÏήÏεÏθε begins a further step of the description. The more usual connection with δαÏήÏεÏθε , preferred also by Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 287 [E. T. 333] and Bleek, is inadmissible, because Îµá¼°Ï cannot be taken in the pregnant meaning (instead of á¼Î½ ; for the element of “motion towards” is not implied in δαÏÎ®Ï .), and because the explanation (see my first edition): ye shall be brought under blows of scourges into synagogues (comp. Bengel, Lange), is not accordant with fact, since the scourging took place in the synagogues; see on Matthew 10:17 ; Acts 22:19 . That δαÏÎ®Ï . comes in asyndetically, is in keeping with the emotional character of the discourse.
Îµá¼°Ï Î¼Î±ÏÏÏÏ . αá½Ïοá¿Ï ] i.e. in order that a testimony may be given to them, the rulers and kings, namely, regarding me (comp. previously á¼Î½ÎµÎºÎµÎ½ á¼Î¼Î¿á¿¦ ), regarding my person and my work (not: “intrepidi, quo causam meam defendatis, animi,” Fritzsche) which, no doubt, involves their inexcusableness in the event of their unbelief; but it is arbitrary to explain the dative here just as if it were Îµá¼°Ï ÎºÎ±ÏηγοÏίαν κ . á¼Î»ÎµÎ³Ïον αá½Ïῶν (Euthymius Zigabenus, Theophylact, and many others). Comp. on Matthew 10:18 .
Mark 13:10 . And this your vocation fraught with suffering will not soon pass away; among all nations ( ÏάνÏα has the emphasis) must first (before the end of the sorrows appears, comp. á¼ÏÏαὶ ὠδίνÏν , Mark 13:9 ), etc. These words are neither disturbing nor inappropriate (as Köstlin judges, p. 352, comp. Schenkel and Weiss); they substantially agree with Matthew 24:14 , and do not betray a “more advanced position in point of time” on Mark’s part (Hilgenfeld), nor are they concocted by the latter out of κ . Ïοá¿Ï á¼Î¸Î½ÎµÏιν , Matthew 10:18 (Weiss).
Mark 13:11 . μελεÏá¾¶Ïε the proper word for the studying of discourses . See Wetstein. The opposite of extemporizing. Comp. Dem. 1129, 9 : μελεÏᾶν Ïὴν á¼Ïολογίαν á½Ïá½²Ï á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν .
δοθῠ] has the emphasis.
Î¿á½ Î³Î¬Ï á¼ÏÏε á½Î¼Îµá¿Ï ] of them it is absolutely denied that they are the speakers. Comp. on Matthew 10:20 .
Mark 13:12 . See on Matthew 10:21 . From that hostile delivering up, however (comp. ÏαÏαδιδÏνÏÎµÏ , Mark 13:11 ), neither the relationship of brother nor of child, etc., will protect my confessors.
Mark 13:13 . á½ÏÎ¿Î¼ÎµÎ¯Î½Î±Ï ] according to the context here: in the confession of my name . See above, διὰ Ïὸ á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î¬ Î¼Î¿Ï . See, moreover, on Matthew 24:13 . The ÏÎÎ»Î¿Ï is that of the ὠδίνÏν , Mark 13:9 , not that “of the theocratic period of the world’s history” (Schenkel).
Verses 14-23
Mark 13:14-23 . See on Matthew 24:15-26 . Comp. Luke 21:20-24 , who, however, has freely elements that are peculiar.
á½ ÏÎ¿Ï Î¿á½ Î´Îµá¿ ] thoughtful, but more indefinite designation of the sacred temple-area than in Matthew, where the more definite expression, as well as the reference by name (not merely suggested by the use of the set expression Ïὸ βδÎλ . Ï . á¼Ïημ .) to Daniel 9:27 , betrays a later manipulation.
Mark 13:16 . á½ Îµá¼°Ï Ïὸν á¼Î³Ïὸν ὤν ] he who is (has gone) into the field . See on Mark 2:1 .
Mark 13:18 . Mark has, with a view to his Gentile-Christian readers, passed over the μηδὲ ÏαββάÏῳ , which was in the collection of Logia, in Matthew 24:20 .
Mark 13:19 . á¼ÏονÏαι ⦠θλίÏÎ¹Ï ] “Tempori adscribitur res, quae in tempore fit; una et continua erit calamitas,” Wetstein.
οἵα οὠγÎγονε κ . Ï . λ .] Comp. Plato, Rep. vi. p. 492 E: οá½Ïε Î³á½°Ï Î³Î¯Î³Î½ÎµÏαι , οá½Ïε γÎγονεν , οá½Ïʼ οá½Î½ μὴ γÎνηÏαι .
ÏοιαÏÏη ] after οἵα . See Fritzsche, ad Marc. p. 14; Kühner, II. p. 527.
κÏίÏεÏÏ á¼§Ï á¼ÎºÏÎ¹Ï . á½ ÎεÏÏ ] Comp. Mark 13:20 : διὰ ÏÎ¿á½ºÏ á¼ÎºÎ»ÎµÎºÏÎ¿á½ºÏ Î¿á½Ï á¼Î¾ÎµÎ»ÎξαÏο , Herod, iii. 147: á¼Î½ÏÎ¿Î»Î¬Ï Ïε , Ïá½°Ï â¦ á¼Î½ÎµÏÎλλεÏο , Philostr. V. Ap. iv. 13. 150: Ïá¿Ï Î¼Î®Î½Î¹Î´Î¿Ï á¼£Î½ á¼Î¼Î®Î½Î¹ÏÎ±Ï . The mode of expression has for its object “gravius eandem notionem bis iterari,” Lobeck, Paralip. p. 522. A contrast with the Jewish state as a human κÏίÏÎ¹Ï (Lange) is fanciful. κÏίÏÎ¹Ï , that which is created , see on Romans 8:19 .
á½ÏοÏλαν .] 1 Timothy 6:10 .
Mark 13:23 . In Matthew at this point the saying about the lightning and the carcase, which certainly belongs originally to this place, is added (Mark 13:27-28 ).
Verses 24-27
Mark 13:24-27 . See on Matthew 24:29-31 . Comp. Luke 21:25-28 .
á¼Î»Î»Ê¼ ] breaking off and leading over to a new subject. Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 34 f.
á¼Î½ á¼ÎºÎµÎ¯Î½Î±Î¹Ï Ï . ἡμÎÏ . μεÏá½° Ï . Î¸Î»Î¯Ï . á¼Îº .] Thus in Mark also the Parousia is predicted as setting in immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem, since it is still to follow in those days [156] (comp. Mark 13:19-20 ). The εá½Î¸ÎÏÏ of Matthew is not thereby avoided (de Wette, Bleek, and others), but this εá½Î¸ÎÏÏ is only a still more express and more direct definition, which tradition has given to the saying. To refer á¼Î½ á¼Îº . Ï . ἡμ ., to the times of the church that are still continuing, is an exegetical impossibility. Even Baur and Hilgenfeld are in error in holding that Mark has conceived of the Parousia as at least not following so immediately close upon the destruction.
Mark 13:25 . οἱ á¼ÏÏÎÏÎµÏ Ïοῦ οá½Ïανοῦ κ . Ï . λ .] the stars of heaven shall be, etc., which is more simple (comp. Revelation 6:13 ) than that which is likewise linguistically correct: the stars shall from heaven , etc. (Hom. Od. xiv. 31, II. xi. 179; Soph. Aj. 1156; Aesch. ii. 34; Galatians 5:4 ; 2 Peter 3:17 ).
á¼ÏονÏαι á¼ÎºÏίÏÏ .] more graphic and vividly realizing than the simple ÏεÏοῦνÏαι (Matt.).
Mark 13:26 . Mark has not the order of sequence of the event, as Matthew depicts it; he relates summarily .
Mark 13:27 . á¼Ïʼ á¼ÎºÏÎ¿Ï Î³á¿Ï á¼ÏÏ á¼ÎºÏÎ¿Ï Î¿á½Ïανοῦ ] From the outmost border of the earth (conceived as a flat surface) shall the á¼ÏιÏÏ Î½Î¬Î³ÎµÎ¹Î½ begin, and be carried through even to the opposite end, where the outmost border of the heaven ( καÏá½° Ïὸ ÏαινÏμενον of the horizon) sets limit to the earth. The expression is more poetical than in Matthew; it is the more arbitrary to think (with Bleek) in the case of γá¿Ï of those still living, and in that of οá½Ï . of those who sleep in bliss.
[156] It is, in fact, to impute great thoughtlessness and stupidity to Mark, if people can believe, with Baur, Markusev. p. 101, that Mark did not write till after Matthew and Luke, and yet did not allow himself to be deterred by all that had intervened between the composition of Matthew’s Gospel and his own, from speaking of the nearness of the Parousia in the same expressions as Matthew used. This course must certainly be followed, if the composition of Mark (comp. also Köstlin, p. 383) is brought down to so late a date.
Verses 28-32
Mark 13:28-32 . See on Matthew 24:32-36 . Comp. Luke 21:29-33 .
αá½Ïá¿Ï ] prefixed with emphasis (see the critical remarks) as the subject that serves for the comparison: When of it the branch shall have already become tender, so that thus its development has already so far advanced. The singular á½ ÎºÎ»Î¬Î´Î¿Ï , the shoot , belongs to the concrete representation.
Ïὸ θÎÏÎ¿Ï ] is an image of the Messianic period also in the Test. XII. Patr. p. 725.
Mark 13:30 . ἡ γενεὰ αá½Ïη ] i.e. the present generation , which γενεά with αá½Ïη means throughout in the N. T., Matthew 11:16 ; Matthew 12:41-42 ; Matthew 12:45 ; Matthew 23:36 ; Mark 8:12-13 ; Luke 7:31 ; Luke 11:29-32 ; Luke 11:50-51 . Comp. Hebrews 3:10 (Lachmann). Nevertheless, and although Jesus has just (Mark 13:29 ) presupposed of the disciples in general, that they would live to see the Parousia an assumption which, moreover, underlies the exhortations of Mark 13:33 ff. although, too, the context does not present the slightest trace of a reference to the Jewish people , there has been an endeavour very recently to uphold this reference; see especially Dorner, p. 75 ff. The word never means people , [157] but may in the signification race, progenies , receive possibly by virtue of the connection the approximate sense of people , which, however, is not the case here. See, moreover, on Matthew 24:34 .
οá½Î´á½² á½ Ï á¼±ÏÏ ] Observe the climax: the angels , the Son , the Father . Jesus thus confesses in the most unequivocal words that the day and hour of His Parousia are unknown [158] to Himself, to Him the Son of God (see subsequently á½ ÏαÏÎ®Ï ), a confession of non-omniscience, which cannot surprise us (comp. Acts 1:7 ) when we consider the human limitation (comp. Luke 2:52 ) into which the Son of God had entered (comp. on Mark 10:18 ), a confession, nevertheless, which has elicited from the antipathy to Arianism some strange devices to evade it, as when Athanasius and other Fathers (in Suicer, Thes. II. p. 163 f.) gave it as their judgment that Jesus meant the not-knowing of His human nature only (Gregor. Epist. 8:42: “ in natura quidem humanitatis novit diem et horam, non ex natura humanitatis novit”); while Augustine, de Genesi c. Manich. 22, de Trinit. i. 12, and others were of opinion that He did not know it for His disciples , in so far as He had not been commissioned by God to reveal it unto them. See in later times, especially Wetstein. Similarly Victor Antiochenus also and Theophylact suggest that He desired, as a wise Teacher, to keep it concealed from the disciples, although He was aware of it. Lange, L. J. II. 3, p. 1280, invents the view that He willed not to know it (in contrast with the sinful wish to know on the part of the disciples), for there was no call in the horizon of His life for His reflecting on that day. So, in his view, it was likewise with the angels in heaven. The Lutheran orthodoxy asserts that καÏá½° κÏá¿Ïιν He was omniscient, but that ÎÎΤᾺ ΧΡá¿Î£ÎÎ He had not everything in promptu . [159] See Calovius. Ambrosius, de fide , v. 8, cut the knot, and declared that οá½Î´á½² á½ Ï á¼±ÏÏ was an interpolation of the Arians. Nevertheless it is contained implicite also in the εἰ μὴ á½ ÏαÏá½´Ï Î¼ÏÎ½Î¿Ï of Matthew, even although it may not have stood originally in the collection of Logia, but rather is to be attributed to the love of details in Mark, whose dependence not on our Matthew (Baur, Markusev. p. 102, comp. his neut. Theol. p. 102), but on the apostle’s collection of Logia, may be recognised in this more precise explanation.
[157] The signification “people” is rightly not given either by Spitzner on Homer, Il. Exc. ix. 2, or in Stephani Thes. , ed. Hase, II. p. 559 f.; in the latter there are specified (1) genus , progenies; (2) generatio , genitura; (3) aetas , seculum. Comp. Becker, Anecd. p. 231, 11; also Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 353.
[158] Matthew has not οá½Î´á½² á½ Ï á¼±ÏÏ ; according to Köstlin, Holtzmann, and others, he is held to have omitted it on account of its dogmatic difficulty. But this is to carry back the scruples of later prepossession into the apostolic age. Zeller (in Hilgenfeld’s Zeitschr. 1865, p. 308 ff.) finds in the words, because they attribute to Christ a nature exalted above the angels, an indication that our Mark was not written until the first half of the second century; but his view is founded on erroneous assumptions with respect to the origin of the Epistles to the Colossians, Ephesians, and Philippians, and of the fourth Gospel. Moreover, Paul places Christ above the angels in other passages (Romans 8:38 ; 2 Thessalonians 1:7 ), and even as early as in the history of the temptation they minister to Him. Zeller believes that he gathers the like conclusion in respect of the date of the composition of our Gospel (and of that of Luke also), but under analogous incorrect combinations, from the fact that Mark (and Luke) attaches so studious importance to the narratives of the expulsion of demons.
[159] See, on the other hand, Thomasius, Chr. Pers. u. Werk. II. p. 156 f.
Verses 33-37
Mark 13:33-37 . Comp. Matthew 24:42 , Matthew 24:44 ff., Matthew 25:14 . By way of an energetic conclusion Mark has here a passage, which has been formed by the aggregation of several different portions belonging to this connection, and most completely preserved in Matthew from the collection of Logia on the part of tradition or of the evangelist himself into a well-adjusted, compact, and imposing unity.
Mark 13:34 . á½¡Ï ] an anantapodoton , as at Matthew 25:14 . See in loc. With á½¡Ï the plan of the discourse was, after Mark 13:34 , to subjoin: so do I also bid you: watch! Instead of this, after ἵνα γÏηγοÏá¿ , with an abandonment of the plan of sentence introduced by á½¡Ï , there follows at once, with striking and vivid effect, the exhortation itself: γÏηγοÏεá¿Ïε , which now, just because the á½¡Ï is forgotten, is linked on by οá½Î½ .
á¼ÏÏÎ´Î·Î¼Î¿Ï ] is not equivalent to á¼Ïοδημῶν (Matthew 25:14 ), but: who has taken a journey . Pind. Pyth. iv. 8; Plut. Mor. p. 299 E. At the same time á¼Î½ÎµÏείλαÏο is not to be taken as a pluperfect , but: “ as a traveller, when he had left his house, after having given to his slaves the authority and to each one his work, gave to the doorkeeper also command, in order that he should watch .” In this we have to observe: (1) the á¼Î½ÎµÏείλαÏο took place after the á¼ÏÏÎ´Î·Î¼Î¿Ï had gone out of his house; (2) καὶ Î´Î¿á½ºÏ Îº . Ï . λ ., in which καί is also , is subordinate to the á¼ÏÎµá½¶Ï Îº . Ï . λ ., because prior to the leaving of the house; (3) á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏÎ¿Ï á¼ÏÏδημ .] forms one notion: a man finding himself on a journey, a traveller; comp. á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏÎ¿Ï á½Î´Î¯ÏÎ·Ï , Horn. Il. xvi. 263; Od. xiii. 123; á¼Î½Î¸Ï . á¼Î¼ÏοÏÎ¿Ï , Matthew 13:45 , al.; (4) the á¼Î¾Î¿Ï Ïία , the authority concerned in the case, is according to the context the control over the household. This He gave to all in common; and, moreover, to every one in particular the special business which he had to execute. Fritzsche is wrong in making the participles á¼ÏÎµÎ¯Ï â¦ ÎºÎ±á½¶ δοÏÏ dependent on á¼ÏÏÎ´Î·Î¼Î¿Ï : “homo, qui relicta domo sua et commissa servis procuratione assignatoque suo cuique penso peregre abfuit.” Against this may be urged, partly that á¼ÏÎµá½¶Ï Ï . οἰκ . αá½Ïοῦ would be a quite superfluous definition to á¼ÏÏÎ´Î·Î¼Î¿Ï , partly that Î´Î¿á½ºÏ Îº . Ï . λ . would need to stand before á¼ÏÎµá½¶Ï Îº . Ï . λ ., because the man first made the arrangement and then left the house.
Mark 13:35 . γÏηγοÏεá¿Ïε οá½Î½ ] the apostles thus are here compared with the doorkeeper .
As to the four watches of the night , see on Matthew 14:24 . They belong to the pictorial effect of the parable; the night -season is in keeping with the figurative γÏηγοÏεá¿Ïε , without exactly expressing “a dark and sad time” (Lange). Singularly at variance with the text as it stands, Theophylact and many others interpret it of the four ages of human life.
Mark 13:37 . The reference to one thought is not at variance with the use of the plural ἠ(see the critical remarks). See Kühner, ad Xen. Anab. iii. 5. 5.
Ïá¾¶Ïι ] to all who confess me.