Note 55 — Chapter III · RETIREMENT TO THE MOUNT OF OLIVES, ARREST, TRIAL, CONDEMNATION AND CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS.
George Eliot translation
1 Orig. c. Cels. ii. 24: λέγει (ὁ Κέλσος)· τί οὖν ποτνιᾶται, καὶ ὀδύρεται, καὶ τὸν τοῦ ὀλέθρου φόβον εὔχεται παραδραμεῖν, λέγων κ.τ.λ.: He says (i.e. Celsus): Why then does he supplicate help, and bewail himself, and pray for escape from the fear of death, saying, etc. Julian, in a Fragment of Theodore of Mopsuestia, ap. Münter, Fragm. Patr. græc. Fasc. 1, p. 121: ἀλλὰ καὶ τοιαῦτα προσεύχεται, φήσιν, ὁ Ἰ., οἶα ἄθλιος ἄνθρωπος, συμφορὰν φέρειν εὐκόλως οὐ δυνάμενος, καὶ ὑπ’ ἀγγέλου, θεὸς ὢν, ἐνισχύεται. Jesus, says he, also presents such petitions as a wretched mortal would offer, when unable to bear a calamity with serenity; and although divine, he is strengthened by an angel. ↑
2 Gramond. hist. Gall. ab. exc. Henr. IV. L. iii. p. 211: Lucilius Vanini—dum in patibulum trahitur—Christo illudit in hæc eadem verba: illi in extremis præ timore imbellis sudor: ego imperterritus morior. ↑
3 Evang. Nicod. c. xx. ap. Thilo, 1, s. 702 ff.: ἐγὸ γὰρ οἶδα, ὅτι ἄνθρωπός ἐστι, καὶ ἥκουσα αὐτοῦ λέγοντος· ὅτι περίλυπός ἐστιν ἡ ψυχή μου ἕως θανάτου. ↑
4 Ibid. s. 706. Hades replies to Satan: εἰ δὲ λέγεις, ὅτι ἥκουσας αὑτοῦ φοβουμένου τὸν θάνατον, παίξων σε καὶ γελῶν ἔφη τοῦτο, θέλων, ἵνα σε ἀρπάσῃ ἐν χειρὶ δυνατῇ. ↑
5 Orig. c. Cels. ii. 25. ↑
6 Hieron. Comm. in Matth. in loc.: Contristabatur non timore patiendi, qui ad hoc venerat, ut pateretur, sed propter infelicissimum Judam, et scandalum omnium apostolorum, et rejectionem populi Judæorum, et eversionem miseræ Hierusalem. ↑
7 Calvin, Comm. in harm. evangg. Matth. xxvi. 37: Non—mortem horruit simpliciter, quatenus transitus est e mundo sed quia formidabile Dei tribunal illi erat ante oculos, judex ipse incomprehensibili vindicta armatus, peccata vero nostra, quorum onus illi erat impositum, sua ingenti mole eum premebant. Comp. Luther’s Hauspostille, die erste Passionspredigt. ↑
8 Lightfoot, p. 884 f. ↑
9 Thiess, Krit. Comm. s. 418 ff. ↑
10 Ut sup. s. 549, 554 f., Anm. ↑
11 Schuster, zur Erläuterung des N. T., in Eichhorn’s Biblioth. 9, s. 1012 ff. ↑
12 Hess, Gesch. Jesu, 2, s. 322 ff.; Kuinöl, in Matth., p. 719. ↑
13 Ullmann, über die Unsündlichkeit Jesu, in his Studien, 1, s. 61. Hasert, ib. 3, 1, s. 66 ff. ↑
14 Ullmann, ut sup. ↑
15 Hasert, ut sup. ↑
16 Luther, in der Predigt vom Leiden Christi im Garten. ↑
17 Ambrosius in Luc., Tom. x. 56. ↑
18 In Matthaei’s N. T., p. 447. ↑
19 Lightfoot, ut sup. ↑
20 Venturini, 3, 677, and conjecturally Paulus also, s. 561. ↑
21 Eichhorn, allg. Bibl. 1, s. 628; Thiess, in loc. ↑
22 Comp. on this subject and the following, Gabler, neust. theol. Journal, 1, 2, s. 109 ff. 3, s. 217 ff. ↑
23 Comp. Julian, ap. Theod. of Mopsuestia in Münter’s Fragm. Patr. 1, p. 121 f. ↑
24 Ueber den Lukas, s. 288; comp. De Wette, in loc. and Theile, zur. Biogr. Jesu, § 32. Neander also appears willing silently to abandon this trait and the following one. ↑
25 Ancoratus, 31. ↑
26 Vid. Wetstein, s. 807. ↑
27 De part. animal. iii. 15. ↑
28 Vid. ap. Michaelis, not. in loc., and Kuinöl, in Luc., p. 691 f. ↑
29 Paulus, ut sup. s. 549. ↑
30 Theile, in Winer’s and Engelhardt’s krit. Journal, 2, s. 353; Neander, L. J. Chr., s. 616 f. ↑
31 Comp. Weisse, die evang. Gesch. 1, s. 611. ↑
32 Olshausen, 2, s. 429. ↑
33 Lücke, 2, s. 591. ↑
34 Schneckenburger, Beiträge, s. 65 f. ↑
35 Comm. 1, s. 177 f. ↑
36 Lücke, 2, s. 392 ff. ↑
37 Olshausen, 2, s. 429 f. ↑
38 Commentatio critica, qua Evangelium Joannis genuinum esse—ostenditur, p. 57 ff. ↑
39 Probab. p. 33 ff. ↑
40 Goldhorn, über das Schweigen des Joh. Evangeliums über den Seelenkampf Jesu in Gethsemane, in Tzschirner’s Magazin. f. christl. Prediger, 1, 2, s. 1 ff. ↑
41 Vid. the Review of Usteri’s Comm. crit., in Winer’s and Engelhardt’s n. krit. Journal, 2, s. 359 ff. ↑
42 Hase, L. J., § 134; Lücke, 2, s. 591 f., Anm. ↑
43 Against the offence which it has pleased Tholuck (Glaubw. s. 41) to take at this expression (Verwischen), comp. the Aphorismen zur Apologie des Dr. Strauss und seines Werkes, s. 69 f. ↑
44 L. J. 1, b, s. 165 f. ↑
45 Vom Zweck J. und seiner Jünger, s. 124. ↑
46 2, s. 588 f. ↑
47 Ut sup. ↑
48 Vid. Lücke, in loc.; Hase, L. J., § 135. ↑
49 Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, b, s. 567. ↑
50 Lücke, 2, s. 599; Hase, ut sup.; Olshausen, 2. s. 435. ↑
51 How can Lücke explain the omission of the kiss of Judas in the Gospel of John from its having been too notorious a fact? and how can he adduce as an analogous instance the omission of the transaction between the betrayer and the Sanhedrim by John? for this, as something passing behind the scenes, might very well be left out, but by no means an incident which, like that kiss, happened so conspicuously in the foreground and centre of the scene. ↑
52 So says the Jew of Celsus, Orig. c. Cels. ii. 9: ἐπειδὴ ἡμεῖς ἐλέγξαντες αὐτὸν καὶ καταγνόντες ἠστιοῦμεν κολάζεσθαι, κρυπτόμενος μὲν καὶ διαδιδράσκων ἐπονειδιστότατα ἑάλω. When we, having convicted and condemned him, had determined that he should suffer punishment; concealing himself, and endeavouring to escape, he experienced a most shameful capture. ↑
53 Lücke, 2, s. 597 f.; Olshausen, 2, s. 435; Tholuck, s. 299. The reference to the murderer of Coligny is, however, unwarranted, as any one will find who will look into the book incorrectly cited by Tholuck: Serrani commentatorium de statu religionis et reip. in regno Galliæ, L. x. p. 32, b. The murderer was not in the least withheld from the prosecution of his design by the firmness of the noble old man. Comp. also Schiller, Werke, 16 Bd. s. 382 f., 384; Ersch and Gruber’s Encyclopädie, 7 Band, s. 452 f. Such inaccuracies in the department of modern history cannot indeed excite surprise in a writer who elsewhere (Glaubwürdigkeit, s. 437) speaks of the duke of Orleans, Louis Philippe’s father, as the brother of Louis XVI. How can a knowledge so diversified as that of Dr. Tholuck be always quite accurate. ↑
54 Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, b, s. 570. ↑
55 Ibid. ↑
56 As Lücke, Tholuck and Olshausen, in loc. ↑
57 Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 290. ↑
58 Paulus, exeg. Handb. 3, b, s. 576. ↑
59 Paulus, ut sup. s. 577; Olshausen, 2, s. 244. ↑
60 Thus e.g. Erasmus, in loc. ↑
61 Thus Winer, N. T. Gramm., § 41, 5; Tholuck and Lücke, in loc. ↑
62 Winer, Gramm., § 57, 4. ↑
63 Thus Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 295. ↑
64 Schleiermacher, ut sup.; comp. Fritzsche, in loc. Matth. ↑
65 Vol. II. § 67. Vol. III. § 114. ↑
66 Ut sup. ↑
67 Matthew does not mention the blindfolding, and appears to imagine that Jesus named the person who maltreated him, whom he saw, but did not otherwise know. ↑
68 Vid. Gesenius, in loc. ↑
69 Matth. xxvi. 63; comp. Mark xiv. 61: ὁ δὲ Ἰ. ἐσιώπα.
Matth. xxvii. 12: οὐδὲν ἀπεκρίνατο.
Matth. xxvii. 14; comp. Mark xv. 5: καὶ οὐκ ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτῷ πρὸς οὐδὲ ἓν ῥῆμα, ὥστε θαυμάζειν τὸν ἡγεμόνα λίαν.
Luke xxiii. 9: αὐτὸς δὲ οὐδὲν ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτῷ.
John xix. 9: ὁ δὲ Ἰ. ἀπόκρισιν οὐκ ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ. ↑
70 Vol. II. § 74. ↑
71 Thus Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 289; Olshausen, 2, s. 445. ↑
72 Thus Paulus, ut sup. s. 577 f. ↑
73 Comp. Weisse, die evang. Geschichte, 1, s. 609. ↑
74 Bengel, in the Gnomon. ↑
75 Paulus, ut sup. s. 578. ↑
76 Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 2, s. 343. ↑
77 Paulus and Olshausen, in loc.; Schleiermacher, ut sup. 289; Neander, s. 622, Anm. ↑
78 Comp. de Wette, in loc. ↑
79 Thesaurus, vid. ἀπάνχω. ↑
80 Grotius. ↑
81 Heinsius. ↑
82 Perizonius. ↑
83 Thus the Vulgate and Erasmus. See in opposition to all these interpretations, Kuinöl, in Matth., p. 473 ff. ↑
84 Œcumenius, on the Acts, I.: ὁ Ἰούδας οὐκ ἐναπέθανε τῇ ἀνχόνῃ, ἀλλ’ ἐπεβίω, κατενεχθεὶς πρὸ τοῦ ἀποπνιγῆναι. Comp. Theophylact, on Matth. xxvii. and a Schol. Ἀπολιναρίου ap. Matthæi. ↑
85 Thus, after Casaubon, Paulus, 3, b, s. 457 f.; Kuinöl, in Matth. 747 f.; Winer, b. Realw. Art. Judas, and with some indecision Olshausen, 2, s. 455 f. Even Fritzsche is become so weary on the long way to these last chapters of Matthew, that he contents himself with this reconciliation, and, on the presupposition of it, maintains that the two accounts concur amicissime. ↑
86 2 Band, 2 Stück, s. 248 f. ↑
87 L. J., § 132. Comp. Theile, zur Biographie Jesu, § 33. ↑
88 Vid. Kuinöl, in Matth., p. 748. ↑
89 Vid. Schmidt’s Biblioth., ut sup. s. 251 f. ↑
90 Paulus, 3, b, s. 457 f.; Fritzsche, p. 799. ↑
91 Vid. De Wette, in loc. ↑
92 In other parts of the N. T. also we find passages from this psalm messianically applied: as v. 4, John xv. 25, v. 9; John ii. 17; and John xix. 28 f., probably v. 21. ↑
93 Still for other conjectures see Kuinöl, in loc. ↑
94 § 119. ↑
95 Hitzig, in Ullmann’s and Umbreit’s Studien, 1830, 1, s. 35; Gesenius, Wörterbuch; comp. Rosenmüller’s Scholia in V. T. 7, 4, s. 320 ff. ↑
96 Tertull. Apologet. c. xxi.: Ea omnia super Christo Pilatus, et ipse jam pro sua conscientia Christianus, Cæsari tum Tiberio nunciavit. c. v.: Tiberius ergo, cujus tempore nomen Christianum in seculum introit, annunciatum sibi ex Syria Palæstina, quod illic veritatem illius Divinitatis revelaverat, detulit ad Senatum cum prærogativa suffragii sui. Senatus, quia non ipse probaverat, respuit. For further details on this subject, see Fabricius, Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, p. 214 ff., 298 ff.; comp. 2, p. 505. ↑
97 Œcumen. ad Act. i.: τοῦτο δὲ σαφέστερον ἱστορεῖ Παπίας, ὁ Ἰωάννου τοῦ ἀποστόλου μαθητής· μέγα ἀσεβείας ὑπόδειγμα ἐν τούτῳ τῷ κόσμῳ περιεπάτησεν Ἰούδας. Πρησθεὶς γὰρ ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τὴν σάρκα, ὥστε μὴ δύνασθαι διελθεῖν, ἁμάζης ῥᾳδίως διερχομένης, ὑπὸ τῆς ἁμάξης ἐπίεσθη, ὥστε τὰ ἔνκατα αὐτοῦ ἐκκενωθῆναι. ↑
98 Vid. sup. ↑
99 In Münter’s Fragm. Patr. 1, p. 17 ff. For the rest the passage is of very similar tenor with that of Œcumenius, and is partly an exaggeration of it: τοῦτο δὲ σαφέστερον ἱστορεῖ Παπίας, ὁ Ἰωάννου μαθητὴς, λέγων οὔτως ἐν τῷ τετάρτῳ τῆς ἐξηγήσεως τῶν κυριακῶν λόγων· μέγα δὲ ἀσεβείας ὑπόδειγμα έν τούτῳ τῷ κόσμῳ περιεπάτησεν ὁ Ἰούδας· πρησθεὶς ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τὴν σάρκα, ὥστε μηδὲ ὁπόθεν ἃμαξα ῥᾳδίως δίερχεται, ἐκεῖνον δύνασθαι διελθεῖν, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ αὐτὸν μόνον τὸν ὄνκον τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ· τὰ μὲν γὰρ βλέφαρα τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτοῦ (Cod. Venet.: φασὶ τοσοῦτον ἐξοιδῆσαι, ὡς αὐτὸν μὲν καθόλου τὸ φῶς μὴ βλέπειν) μηδὲ ὑπὸ ἰατροῦ δίοπτρας ὀφθῆναι κ.τ.λ. Μετὰ πολλὰς δὲ βασάνους καὶ τιμωρίας ἐν ἰδίῳ, φασὶ, χωρίω τελευτήσαντος κ.τ.λ.. Papias, the disciple of John, gives a clearer account of this (in the fourth section of his exegesis of our Lord’s words) as follows: Judas moved about in this world a terrible example of impiety, being swollen in body to such a degree that where a chariot could easily pass he was not able to find a passage, even for the bulk of his head. His eyelids, they say, were so swelled out that he could not see the light, nor could his eyes be made visible even by the physician’s dioptra, etc. After suffering many torments and judgments, dying, as they say, in his own field, etc. ↑
100 Comp. De Wette, exeg. Handb. 1, 1, s. 231 f.; 1, 4, s. 10 f. ↑
101 According to Babl. Sanhedrin, ap. Lightfoot, p. 486, this mode of procedure would have been illegal. It is there said: Judicia de capitalibus finiunt eodem die si sint ad absolutionem; si vero sini ad damnationem, finiuntur die sequente. ↑
102 Besides this passage of John: ἡμὶν οὐκ ἔξεστιν ἀποκτεῖναι οὐδένα, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, there is no other authority for the existence of this state of things than an obscure and variously interpreted tradition, Avoda Zara f. viii. 2 (Lightfoot, p. 1123 f.): Rabh Cahna dicit, cum ægrotaret R. Ismaël bar Jose, miserunt ad eum, dicentes: dic nobi, ô Domine, duo aut tria, quæ aliquando dixisti nobis nomine patris tui. Dicit iis —— quadraginta annis ante excidium templi migravit Synedrium et sedit in tabernis. Quid sibi vult hæc traditio? Rabh Isaac, bar Abdimi dicit: non judicârunt judicia mulctativa. Dixit R. Nachman bar Isaac: ne dicat, quod non judicârunt judicia mulctativa, sed quod non judicârunt judicia capitalia. With this may be compared moreover the information given by Josephus, Antiq. xx. ix. 1, that it was not lawful for Ananus (the high priest) to assemble the Sanhedrim without the consent of the procurator. On the other hand the execution of Stephen (Acts vii.) without the sanction of the Romans might seem to speak to the contrary; but this was a tumultuary act, undertaken perhaps in the confidence that Pilate was absent. Compare on this point Lücke, 2, s. 631 ff. ↑
103 De bell. Jud. II. ix. 3. ↑
104 As Lücke supposes, s. 631. ↑
105 Calvin, in loc. ↑
106 Lücke and Tholuck, in loc. ↑
107 Comp. Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 252. ↑
108 Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 291. ↑
109 Dial. cum Tryph. 103. ↑
110 It is doubted whether this custom, of which we should have known nothing but for the N. T., was of Roman or Jewish origin; comp. Fritzsche and Paulus, in loc, and Baur, über die ursprungliche Bedeutung des Passahfestes, u. s. f., Tüb. Zeitschr. f. Theol. 1832, 1, s. 94. ↑
111 According to one reading, the full name of this man was Jesus Barabbas, which we mention here merely because Olshausen finds it “remarkable.” Bar Abba meaning Son of the father, Olshausen exclaims: All that was essential in the Saviour appears in the murderer as caricature! and he quotes as applicable to this case the verse: ludit in humanis divina potentia rebus. For our own part, we can only see in this idea of Olshausen’s a lusus humanæ impotentiæ. ↑
112 In the Evang. Nicodemi and in later ecclesiastical historians she is called Procula Πρόκλη. Comp. Thilo. Cod. Apocr. N. T., p. 522, Paulus, exeg. Handb., 2, b, s. 640 f. ↑
113 Cap. II. s. 520, ap. Thilo. ↑
114 Ignat. ad Philippens. iv.: φοβεῖ δὲ τὸ γύναιον, ἐν ὀνείροις αὐτὸ καταταράττων καὶ παύειν πειρᾶται τὰ κατὰ τὸν σταυρόν. (The devil) terrifies the woman, troubling her in her dreams, and endeavours to put a stop to the things of the cross. The Jews in the Evang. Nicodemi, c. II. p. 524, explain the dream as a result of the magic arts of Jesus: γόης ἐστι—ἰδοὺ ὀνειρόπεμπτα ἔπεμψε πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκά σου, He is a magician—see, he has sent messages in a dream to thy wife. ↑
115 E.g. Theophylact, vid. Thilo, p. 523. ↑
116 Vid. Paulus and Kuinöl, in loc. They especially adduce the dream of Cæsar’s wife the night before his assassination. ↑
117 Comp. Sota, viii 6. ↑
118 Fritzsche, in Matth., p. 808. ↑
119 Comp. in particular the passages cited by Wetstein, on Matth. xxvii. 26. ↑
120 Paulus, ut sup. s. 647. ↑
121 From the explanation of Paulus, s. 649 f., it appears highly probable that the στέφανος ἐξ ἀκανθῶν was not a crown of sharp thorns, but one taken from the nearest hedge, in order to deride Jesus by the vilissima corona, spineola (Plin. H. N. xxi. 10). ↑
122 A similar disguising of a man, in derision of a third party, is adduced by Wetstein, (p. 533 f.) from Philo, in Flaccum. ↑
123 Thus Paulus, Kuinöl, Tholuck and Olshausen in their Commentaries; Neander, L. J. Chr., s. 634. ↑
124 Fritzsche, in Marc. 684: Significat Joannes, Jesum suam crucem portavisse, donec ad Calvariæ locum pervenisset. ↑
125 Joseph., Antiq. xiv. vii. 2. ↑
126 It is used in the former way by Grotius; in the latter, by Olshausen, 2. s. 481. ↑
127 Comp. Paulus, Fritzsche, and De Wette, in loc. ↑
128 Vid. Paulus and Fritzsche, in loc. Winer, bibl. Realw. art. Golgotha. ↑
129 Wassenbergh, Diss. de trajectionibus N. T. in Balcknaer’s scholæ in 11. quosdam N. T. 2, p. 31. ↑
130 Comp. Schleiermacher, über den Lukas, s. 295; Winer, N. T. Gramm., s. 226, and Fritzsche, in Matt., p. 814. ↑
131 Apol. i. 35. Dial. c. Tryph. xcvii. ↑
132 Christologie des A. T. 1, a, s. 182 ff. ↑
133 Paulus, exeg. Handbuch 3, b, s. 669–754; Bähr, in Tholuck’s liter. Anzeiger für christl. Theol. 1835, No. 1–6. Comp. also Neander, L. J. Chr., s. 636, Anm. ↑
134 Adv. Marcion, iii. 19. ↑
135 Mostellaria, ii. 1. ↑
136 Vid. Kuinöl, Paulus, in loc. ↑
137 Sanhedrim, f. xliii. 1, ap. Wetstein, p. 635: Dixit R. Chaja, f. R. Ascher, dixisse R. Chasdam: exeunti, ut capite plectatur, dant bibendum granum turis in poculo vini, ut alienetur mens ejus, sec. d. Prov. xxxi. 6: date siceram pereunti et vinum amaris anima. ↑
138 Vid. Fritzsche, in loc. ↑
139 Comp. Paulas, in loc. ↑
140 Thus Kuinöl, in Luc., p. 710 f.; Tholuck, s. 316. ↑
141 Comp. also Bleek, Comm. zum Hebräerbrief, 2, s. 312, Anm.; De Wette, exeg. Handb. 1, 3, s. 198. ↑
142 Kuinöl, in Luc. p. 710. ↑
143 Olshausen, p. 484; Neander, s. 637. ↑
144 Thus Chrysostom and others. ↑
145 Beza and Grotius. ↑
146 Paulus, s. 763; Winer, N. T. Gramm., s. 143; Fritzsche, in Matth., p. 817. ↑
147 Vid. Thilo, Cod. apocr. 1, s. 143. Further apocryphal information concerning the two malefactors crucified with Jesus is to be found in the evang. infant. arab. c. xxiii. ap. Thilo, p. 92 f.; comp. the note p. 143; in the evang. Nicod. c. ix. 10, Thilo, p. 581 ff.; c. xxvi. p. 766 ff. ↑
148 Paulus and Kuinöl, in loc. ↑
149 Confessio Judæi ægroti, ap. Wetstein, p. 820:—da portionem meam in horto Edenis, et memento mei in seculo futuro, quod absconditum est justis. Other passages are given, ib., p. 819. ↑
150 Cetuboth, f. ciii. ap. Wetstein, p. 819: Quo die Rabbi moriturus erat, venit vox de cœlo, dixitque: qui præsens aderit morienti Rabbi, ille intrabit in paradisum. ↑
151 Vid. Wetstein, in loc. Matth. ↑
152 Quoted in Wetstein, p. 536; compare, however, the correction of the text in Paulus, ex. handb. 3, b, s. 751. ↑
153 Tholuck, in loc. ↑
154 E. G. Theile, zur Biographie Jesu, § 36, Anm. 13. ↑
155 Expositors observe in connexion with this particular, that the coat of the Jewish high priest was also of this kind. Jos. Antiq. iii. vii. 4—The same view of the above difference nas been already presented in the Probabilia, p. 80 f. ↑
156 Apol. i. 35. ↑
157 Adv. Marcion, ut sup. ↑
158 Justin, Apol. i. 50, and elsewhere, even speaks of apostacy and denial on the part of all the disciples after the crucifixion. ↑
159 Vid. Calvin, Comm. in harm. evv. in Matth. xxvii. 46; Olshausen, in loc. ↑
160 Thus Paulus, Gratz, in loc. Schleiermacher, Glaubenslehre, 2, s. 154, Anm. ↑
161 Such is the inference drawn by the author of the Wolfenbüttel Fragments, von Zweck Jesu und seiner Jünger, s. 153. ↑
162 Schneckenburger, Beiträge, s. 66 f. ↑
163 According to Olshausen, s. 495, there is no syllable in this speech by which such a meaning is intimated; on the contrary, a secret horror had already diffused itself over the minds of the scoffers, and they trembled at the thought that Elias might appear in the storm. But when one who attempts to give a beverage to Jesus is dissuaded under the pretext of waiting to see if Elias would come to save him, εἰ ἔρχεται Ἠλίας, σώσων αὐτὸν, this pretext is plainly enough shown to be meant in derision, and hence the horror and trembling belong only to the unscientific animus of the biblical commentator, which makes him contemplate the history of the passion above all else, as a mysterium tremendum, and causes him to discover even in Pilate a depth of feeling which is nowhere attributed to this Roman in the gospels. ↑
164 Credner, Einleitung in das N. T. 1, s. 198. ↑
165 Thus Rettig, exegetische Analekten, in Ullmann’s und Umbreit’s Studien, 1830, 1, s. 106 ff.; Tholuck, Glaubwürdigkeit, s. 307 ff.; comp. on the various attempts at reconciliation Lücke and De Wette, in loc. Joh. ↑