King James Bible Adam Clarke Bible Commentary Martin Luther's Writings Wesley's Sermons and Commentary Neurosemantics Audio / Video Bible Evolution Cruncher Creation Science Vincent New Testament Word Studies KJV Audio Bible Family videogames Christian author Godrules.NET Main Page Add to Favorites Godrules.NET Main Page




Bad Advertisement?

News & Reviews:
  • World News
  • Movie Reviews
  • Book Search

    Are you a Christian?

    Online Store:
  • Your Own eBook/eBay Business
  • Visit Our eBay Store

    Automated eBook Business



  • PARALLEL HISTORY BIBLE - Mark 1:44


    CHAPTERS: Mark 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16     

    VERSES: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45

    TEXT: BIB   |   AUDIO: MISLR - MISC - DAVIS - FOCHT   |   VIDEO: BIB


    ENGLISH - HISTORY - INTERNATIONAL - FACEBOOK - GR FORUMS - GODRULES ON YOUTUBE

    HELPS: KJS - KJV - ASV - DBY - DOU - WBS - YLT - HEB - BBE - WEB - NAS - SEV - TSK - CRK - WES - MHC - GILL - JFB

    LXX- Greek Septuagint - Mark 1:44

    και 2532 λεγει 3004 5719 αυτω 846 ορα 3708 5720 μηδενι 3367 μηδεν 3367 ειπης 2036 5632 αλλ 235 υπαγε 5217 5720 σεαυτον 4572 δειξον 1166 5657 τω 3588 ιερει 2409 και 2532 προσενεγκε 4374 5628 περι 4012 του 3588 καθαρισμου 2512 σου 4675 α 3739 προσεταξεν 4367 5656 μωσης 3475 εις 1519 μαρτυριον 3142 αυτοις 846

    Douay Rheims Bible

    And he saith to him: See thou tell no one; but go, shew thyself to the
    high priest, and offer for thy cleansing the things that Moses commanded, for a testimony to them.

    King James Bible - Mark 1:44

    And saith unto him, See thou say nothing to any man: but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing those things which
    Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

    World English Bible

    and said to him, "See you say nothing to anybody, but go show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing the things which
    Moses commanded, for a testimony to them."

    Early Church Father Links

    Anf-07 ix.vii.iv Pg 8, Anf-09 iv.iii.xxii Pg 8, Npnf-101 vii.1.LXXXII Pg 47

    World Wide Bible Resources


    Mark 1:44

    Early Christian Commentary - (A.D. 100 - A.D. 325)

    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xxxv Pg 12
    See Lev. xiii. and xiv.

    The interpretation of this sense it will be our task to ascertain. Marcion’s labour, however, is to object to us the strictness4870

    4870 Morositatem.

    of the law, with the view of maintaining that here also Christ is its enemy—forestalling4871

    4871 Prævenientem.

    its enactments even in His cure of the ten lepers. These He simply commanded to show themselves to the priest; “and as they went, He cleansed them”4872

    4872


    Anf-01 ix.vi.xiii Pg 10
    Matt. xxiii. 2–4.

    He therefore did not throw blame upon that law which was given by Moses, when He exhorted it to be observed, Jerusalem being as yet in safety; but He did throw blame upon those persons, because they repeated indeed the words of the law, yet were without love. And for this reason were they held as being unrighteous as respects God, and as respects their neighbours. As also Isaiah says: “This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me: howbeit in vain do they worship Me, teaching the doctrines and the commandments of men.”3942

    3942


    Anf-01 viii.iv.xvii Pg 7
    This and following quotation taken promiscuously from Matt. xxiii. and Luke xi.

    And to the Scribes, ‘Woe unto you, Scribes! for ye have the keys, and ye do not enter in yourselves, and them that are entering in ye hinder; ye blind guides!’


    Anf-01 viii.iv.xvii Pg 7
    This and following quotation taken promiscuously from Matt. xxiii. and Luke xi.

    And to the Scribes, ‘Woe unto you, Scribes! for ye have the keys, and ye do not enter in yourselves, and them that are entering in ye hinder; ye blind guides!’


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.ix Pg 8
    Luke v. 12–14.

    I shall not be sorry to meet him, and before anything else to point out to him the force of the law figuratively interpreted, which, in this example of a leper (who was not to be touched, but was rather to be removed from all intercourse with others), prohibited any communication with a person who was defiled with sins, with whom the apostle also forbids us even to eat food,3717

    3717


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.ix Pg 33
    Luke v. 14.

    For the figurative signs of the law in its types He still would have observed, because of their prophetic import.3742

    3742 Utpote prophetatæ.

    These types signified that a man, once a sinner, but afterwards purified3743

    3743 Emaculatum.

    from the stains thereof by the word of God, was bound to offer unto God in the temple a gift, even prayer and thanksgiving in the church through Christ Jesus, who is the Catholic Priest of the Father.3744

    3744 [i.e., the Great High Priest whose sacrifice is accepted of the Father, for the sins of the whole world.]

    Accordingly He added: “that it may be for a testimony unto you”—one, no doubt, whereby He would testify that He was not destroying the law, but fulfilling it; whereby, too, He would testify that it was He Himself who was foretold as about to undertake3745

    3745 Suscepturus: to carry or take away.

    their sicknesses and infirmities. This very consistent and becoming explanation of “the testimony,” that adulator of his own Christ, Marcion seeks to exclude under the cover of mercy and gentleness. For, being both good (such are his words), and knowing, besides, that every man who had been freed from leprosy would be sure to perform the solemnities of the law, therefore He gave this precept. Well, what then? Has He continued in his goodness (that is to say, in his permission of the law) or not?  For if he has persevered in his goodness, he will never become a destroyer of the law; nor will he ever be accounted as belonging to another god, because there would not exist that destruction of the law which would constitute his claim to belong to the other god. If, however, he has not continued good, by a subsequent destruction of the law, it is a false testimony which he has since imposed upon them in his cure of the leper; because he has forsaken his goodness, in destroying the law. If, therefore, he was good whilst upholding the law,3746

    3746 Legis indultor.

    he has now become evil as a destroyer of the law. However, by the support which he gave to the law, he affirmed that the law was good.  For no one permits himself in the support of an evil thing. Therefore he is not only bad if he has permitted obedience to a bad law; but even worse still, if he has appeared3747

    3747 Advenit.

    as the destroyer of a good law. So that if he commanded the offering of the gift because he knew that every cured leper would be sure to bring one; he possibly abstained from commanding what he knew would be spontaneously done. In vain, therefore, was his coming down, as if with the intention of destroying the law, when he makes concessions to the keepers of the law. And yet,3748

    3748 Atquin.

    because he knew their disposition,3749

    3749 Formam.

    he ought the more earnestly to have prevented their neglect of the law,3750

    3750 Ab ea avertendos.

    since he had come for this purpose. Why then did he not keep silent, that man might of his own simple will obey the law? For then might he have seemed to some extent3751

    3751 Aliquatenus.

    to have persisted in his patience. But he adds also his own authority increased by the weight of this “testimony.” Of what testimony, I ask,3752

    3752 Jam.

    if not that of the assertion of the law?  Surely it matters not in what way he asserted the law—whether as good, or as supererogatory,3753

    3753 Supervacuus.

    or as patient, or as inconstant—provided, Marcion, I drive you from your position.3754

    3754 Gradu.

    Observe,3755

    3755 Ecce.

    he commanded that the law should be fulfilled.  In whatever way he commanded it, in the same way might he also have first uttered that sentiment:3756

    3756 Sententiam.

    “I came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it.”3757

    3757


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xliv Pg 8
    4. Epiphanius mentions sundry slight alterations in capp. v. 14, 24, vi. 5, 17. In chap. viii. 19 he expunged ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ. From Tertullian’s remarks (chap. xix.), it would seem at first as if Marcion had added to his Gospel that answer of our Saviour which we find related by St. Matthew, chap. xii. 48: “Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?” For he represents Marcion (as in De carne Christi, vii., he represents other heretics, who deny the nativity) as making use of these words for his favourite argument. But, after all, Marcion might use these words against those who allowed the authenticity of Matthew’s Gospel, without inserting them in his own Gospel; or else Tertullian might quote from memory, and think that to be in Luke which was only in Matthew—as he has done at least in three instances. (Lardner refers two of these instances to passages in chap. vii. of this Book iv., where Tertullian mentions, as erasures from Luke, what really are found in Matthew v. 17 and xv. 24. The third instance referred to by Lardner probably occurs at the end of chap. ix. of this same Book iv., where Tertullian again mistakes Matt. v. 17 for a passage of Luke, and charges Marcion with expunging it; curiously enough, the mistake recurs in chap. xii of the same Book.) In Luke x. 21 Marcion omitted the first πάτερ and the words καὶ τῆς γῆς, that he might not allow Christ to call His Father the Lord of earth, or of this world. The second πατήρ in this verse, not open to any inconvenience, he retained. In chap. xi. 29 he omitted the last words concerning the sign of the prophet Jonah; he also omitted all the 30th, 31st, and 32d; in ver. 42 he read κλῆσιν, ‘calling,’ instead of κρίσινjudgment.’ He rejected verses 49, 50, 51, because the passage related to the prophets. He entirely omitted chap. xii. 6; whilst in ver. 8 he read ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Θεοῦ instead of ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ Θεοῦ. He seems to have left out all the 28th verse, and expunged ὑμῶν from verses 30 and 32, reading only ὁ πατήρ. In ver. 38, instead of the words ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ φυλακῇ, καὶ ἐν τῇ τρίτῃ φυλακῇ, he read ἐν τῇ ἑσπερινῇ φυλακῇ. In chap. xiii. he omitted the first five verses, whilst in the 28th verse of the same chapter, where we read, “When ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and ye yourselves thrust out,” he read (by altering, adding, and transposing), “When ye shall see all the just in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves cast out, and bound without, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” He likewise excluded all the remaining verses of this chapter. All chap. xv. after the 10th verse, in which is contained the parable of the prodigal son, he eliminated from his Gospel. In xvii. 10 he left out all the words after λέγετε. He made many alterations in the story of the ten lepers; he left out part of ver. 12, all of ver. 13, and altered ver. 14, reading thus: “There met Him ten lepers; and He sent them away, saying, Show yourselves to the priest;” after which he inserted a clause from chap. iv. 27: “There were many lepers in the days of Eliseus the prophet, but none of them were cleansed, but Naaman the Syrian.” In chap. xviii. 19 he added the words ὁ πατήρ, and in ver. 20 altered οἶδας, thou knowest, into the first person. He entirely omitted verses 31–33, in which our blessed Saviour declares that the things foretold by the prophets concerning His sufferings, and death, and resurrection, should all be fulfilled. He expunged nineteen verses out of chap. xix., from the end of ver. 27 to the beginning of ver. 47. In chap. xx. he omitted ten verses, from the end of ver. 8 to the end of ver. 18. He rejected also verses 37 and 38, in which there is a reference to Moses. Marcion also erased of chap. xxi. the first eighteen verses, as well as verses 21 and 22, on account of this clause, “that all things which are written may be fulfilled;” xx. 16 was left out by him, so also verses 35–; 37, 50, and 51 (and, adds Lardner, conjecturally, not herein following his authority Epiphanius, also vers. 38 and 49). In chap. xxiii. 2, after the words “perverting the nation,” Marcion added, “and destroying the law and the prophets;” and again, after “forbidding to give tribute unto Cæsar,” he added, “and perverting women and children.” He also erased ver. 43. In chap. xxiv. he omitted that part of the conference between our Saviour and the two disciples going to Emmaus, which related to the prediction of His sufferings, and which is contained in verses 26 and 27. These two verses he omitted, and changed the words at the end of ver. 25, ἐλάλησαν οἱ προφῆται, into ἐλάλησα ὑμῖν. Such are the alterations, according to Epiphanius, which Marcion made in his Gospel from St. Luke. Tertullian says (in the 4th chapter of the preceding Book) that Marcion erased the passage which gives an account of the parting of the raiment of our Saviour among the soldiers. But the reason he assigns for the erasure—‘respiciens Psalmi prophetiam’—shows that in this, as well as in the few other instances which we have already named, where Tertullian has charged Marcion with so altering passages, his memory deceived him into mistaking Matthew for Luke, for the reference to the passage in the Psalm is only given by St. Matthew xxvii. 35.


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xxxv Pg 22
    Luke xvii. 14.

    Yet why this, if He meant to cleanse them first? Was it as a despiser of the law, in order to prove to them that, having been cured already on the road, the law was now nothing to them, nor even the priests?  Well, the matter must of course pass as it best may,4880

    4880 Et utique viderit.

    if anybody supposes that Christ had such views as these!4881

    4881 Tam opiniosus.

    But there are certainly better interpretations to be found of the passage, and more deserving of belief: how that they were cleansed on this account, because4882

    4882 Qua: “I should prefer quia” (Oehler).

    they were obedient, and went as the law required, when they were commanded to go to the priests; and it is not to be believed that persons who observed the law could have found a cure from a god that was destroying the law. Why, however, did He not give such a command to the leper who first returned?4883

    4883 Pristino leproso: but doubtful.

    Because Elisha did not in the case of Naaman the Syrian, and yet was not on that account less the Creator’s agent? This is a sufficient answer. But the believer knows that there is a profounder reason. Consider, therefore, the true motives.4884

    4884 Causas.

    The miracle was performed in the district of Samaria, to which country also belonged one of the lepers.4885

    4885


    Edersheim Bible History

    Lifetimes viii.xxvi Pg 16.2


    Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 1

    VERSE 	(44) - 

    Le 14:2-32 Mt 23:2,3 Lu 5:14; 17:14


    PARALLEL VERSE BIBLE

    God Rules.NET