70<\/strong>. And he denied it again<\/em> ] This denial was probably addressed to those round the fire. But escape was hopeless. “Surely,” said one, “ this fellow is one of them;<\/em> ” “ Thou art a Galilan<\/em>,” said another, “and thy speech agreeth thereto<\/em>.” These last words are omitted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Tregelles. “ Thy speech bewrayeth thee<\/em> ” are the words used by St Matthew (Mat 26:73<\/span>). The Galilean burr was rough and indistinct. Hence the Galileans were not allowed to read aloud in the Jewish synagogues.<\/p>\n 70. And a little after<\/B>“aboutthe space of one hour after” (Lu22:59<\/span>). <\/P> they that stood by said againto Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilean, andthy speech agreeth thereto<\/B>“bewrayeth [or ‘discovereth’]thee” (Mt 26:73<\/span>). In Luke(Lu 22:59<\/span>) it is, “Anotherconfidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this [fellow] also was withhim: for he is a Galilean.” The Galilean dialect had a moreSyrian<\/I> cast than that of Judea. If Peter had held hispeace,<\/I> this peculiarity had not been observed; but hoping,probably, to put them off the scent by joining in the firesidetalk,<\/I> he was thus discovered. The Fourth Gospel is particularlyinteresting here: “One of the servants of the high priest, beinghis kinsman [or kinsman to him] whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Didnot I see thee in the garden with Him?” (Joh18:26<\/span>). No doubt his relationship to Malchus drew his attentionto the man who had smitten him, and this enabled him to identifyPeter. “Sad reprisals!” exclaims BENGEL.Poor Peter! Thou art caught in thine own toils; but like a wild bullin a net, thou wilt toss and rage, filling up the measure of thyterrible declension by one more denial of thy Lord, and that thefoulest of all.<\/P><\/p>\n And he denied it again<\/strong>,…. That he was one of the disciples of Jesus:<\/p>\n and a little after<\/strong>; about an hour after, Lu 22:59<\/span>;<\/p>\n they that stood by, said again to Peter, surely thou art one of them<\/strong>; one confidently affirmed that he was with Jesus, and another challenged him with seeing him in the garden with him, Lu 22:59<\/span>, and in general they were of opinion, that he must be one of that sect, giving this as a reason,<\/p>\n for thou art a Galilean<\/strong>: as they supposed Jesus to be; and knowing that in Galilee he had chiefly preached, and wrought his miracles, and had there a large number of followers:<\/p>\n and thy speech agreeth [thereto]<\/strong>; he used words and phrases peculiar to the Galileans, and pronounced as they did: [See comments on Mt 26:73]<\/span>. This clause is omitted in the Vulgate Latin, and is wanting in Beza’s most ancient copy; but is in the other copies, and in all the eastern versions.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And he denied it again. And<\/strong> a little after,” <\/strong>(ho de palin erneito kai meta mikron) “Then he again denied, and, after a little while,” Mat 26:72<\/span>, after his second denial that he knew Jesus, now a third time approached.<\/p>\n 2) ”They that stood by said again to Peter,” <\/strong>(palin hoi parestoles elegon to Petro) “Again those who stood by (stood nearby) said to Peter,” in an accusatory and indicting manner, for it was the truth.<\/p>\n 3) “Surely thou art one of them”<\/strong> (alethos eks auton) “Truly you are out of and from among them,” the followers of Jesus, Mat 26:73<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “For thou<\/strong> art a Galilaean,” <\/strong>(kai gar Galilaios ei) “For indeed you are a Galilaean;” This was about an hour later than the first two successive denials, Luk 22:59<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5) “And thy speech agreeth thereto,” <\/strong>(an interposation) or betrays your native tongue locality, where you are from, Act 2:7<\/span>.<\/p>\n (70) And thy speech agreeth thereto.<\/strong>Singularly enough, the words, which seem so natural, are wanting in many of the best MSS., and may, therefore, possibly have been an interpretative addition, possibly made by St. Mark himself, in what we may call a revised edition of his Gospel.<\/p>\n PETER’S DENIAL OF CHRIST, Mar 14:66-72<\/span>.<\/p>\n 70<\/strong>. <\/strong> A Galilean, and thy speech agreeth thereto <\/em> The broad Galilean brogue was the jest of the more refined speakers of Jerusalem. As many of the Hebrew words resemble each other, with but a slight difference, a Galilean would frequently by his provincial mispronunciation produce an unintended meaning. Many anecdotes are in the Rabbins of these double meanings, as amusing as occur in English of the wrong use or disuse of the initial H.<\/p>\n ‘And after a little while those who stood by again said to Peter, “Truly you are one of them, for you are a Galilean.”<\/p>\n Once aroused the suspicions would not die down and his accent betrayed him. Why else should an unknown Galilean be here? So again they tackled him. Now he was being more directly identified. Galileans spoke in a totally different way to Judaeans.<\/p>\n Mar 14:70<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>And thy speech agreeth thereto.<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> And your pronunciation is of that country. <\/em>Heylin. <\/p>\n 70.<\/strong> ] <\/strong> = , Luke.<\/p>\n <\/strong> ,<\/strong> for, in addition to all that has been hitherto said <\/p>\n Mar 14:70<\/span> . Now, it is the bystanders who persecute Peter with the charge of being a disciple. : they are quite sure of it, for two reasons (1) the maid’s confidence not specified but implied in the , which introduces an additional reason; (2) = you are (by your speech) a Galilean. The addition in some MSS., ., etc., explanatory of the term Galilean, would be quite in Mk.’s manner, but the best authorities omit it.<\/p>\n 70.] = , Luke.<\/p>\n , for, in addition to all that has been hitherto said <\/p>\n a little: Mat 26:73, Mat 26:74, Luk 22:59, Luk 22:60, Joh 18:26, Joh 18:27 <\/p>\n for: Jdg 12:6, Act 2:7 <\/p>\n and thy: [Strong’s G2981], [Strong’s G4675], “Thy dialect,” or mode of speech. From various examples produced by Lightfoot, and Schoetgen, it appears that the Galileans used a very corrupt dialect and pronunciation; interchanging the gutturals, and other letters, and so blending or dividing words as to render them unintelligible, or convey a contrary sense. Thus when a Galilean would have asked, [Strong’s H563], “whose is this lamb,” he pronounced the first word so confusedly that it could not be known whether he meant [Strong’s H2543], “an ass,” [Strong’s H2562], “wine,” [Strong’s H6015], “wool,” or [Strong’s H563], “a lamb.” A certain woman intending to say to a judge, “My lord, I had a picture which they stole; and it was so great, that if you had been placed in it, your feet would not have touched the ground,” so spoiled it by her pronunciation, that her words meant, “Sir slave, I had a beam, and they stole thee away; and it was so great, that if they had hung thee on it, thy feet would not have touched the ground. <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Luk 22:58 – another Act 1:11 – Ye men<\/p>\n 0<\/p>\n Peter denied her statement which made his second denial. The next time it was the people standing near who made the statement, and they supported their claim by referring to the similarity of speech used by Peter and Jesus and his disciples.<\/p>\n Mar 14:70. And after a little while. About an hour elapsed (Luk 22:59).<\/p>\n Again. Notice the correct position.<\/p>\n For thou art also. Not, as Jesus is; but, in addition to what has been said, this is another reason. And thy speech, etc., was probably inserted from Matthew.<\/p>\n Verse 70 <\/p>\n Thy speech agreeth thereto; corresponds with the Galilean dialect.<\/p>\n The third challenge came from the bystanders, several people instead of just one, about an hour later (Luk 22:59). This time Peter went further. He denied that he even knew Jesus (cf. Mar 8:29). He even called down God’s judgment on himself if he was lying. Cursing means he put himself under a curse. Swearing means he affirmed the truthfulness of his words with oaths.<\/p>\n And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art [one] of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth [thereto.] 70. And he denied it again ] This denial was probably addressed to those round the fire. But escape was hopeless. “Surely,” … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:70”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24810","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24810","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24810"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24810\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24810"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24810"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24810"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"