De Moor's Theological Disputation on Mark 15:25 and John 19:14: The Preferred Harmonization Defended

It makes for this interpretation, 1.  that the Division of the Garments after the Crucifixion was just now mentioned, verse 24, and that this history of the division of the garments of our crucified Lord immediately precedes in that very place, when it follows in our verse 25, ἦν δὲ ὥρα τρίτη, καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν, and it was the third hour, and the crucified Him.  2.  It could appear somewhat incongruous, if Mark after the relation of the division of the garments, which came after the Crucifixion, should return to determine the time of the Crucifixion itself:  but these words of Mark in verse 25 are able to be referred to the time of the division of the garments without any scruple; since this time is nowhere expressly determined in the Gospels, but it is related in a general way with other circumstances that this division of garments followed after the Crucifixion.  3.  The particle καὶ/and, which joins two members of a sentence, is best translated by the Hebraism After; as NOLDIUS,[1] in his Concordantiis Particularum Hebræo-Chaldaicarum on the letter ו, number 42, pages m. 295, 296, confirms this use of the letter ו by many examples in the writings of the Hebrews.  For example, thus we have it in Judges 4:1, and the children of Israel proceeded to do evil in the eyes of Jehovah,וְאֵה֖וּד מֵֽת׃, and Ehud was dead, that is, AFTER Ehud was dead, as it is also translated by the Dutch, and in Greek, καὶ Ἀὼδ ἀπέθανε, and Ehud was dead.  In Job 14:10, וְגֶ֣בֶר יָ֭מוּת וַֽיֶּחֱלָ֑שׁ, And man dies and is weakened, that is, AFTER WHICH, AFTER he is weakened.  HEINSIUS chiefly appeals to Joshua 7:25, in which, after the stoning of Achan was related, upon whom it is then said, verse 26, that a great heap of stones were erected:  between which in the plural number it is related concerning the entire family and possession of Achan, וַיִּשְׂרְפ֤וּ אֹתָם֙ בָּאֵ֔שׁ וַיִּסְקְל֥וּ אֹתָ֖ם בָּאֲבָנִֽים׃, and they burned them with fire, and stoned them with stones; which he explains of a Burning following after the stoning, since one that has been burned with fire is not then able to be stoned:  in which Heinsius follows the Targumist, who translates it, בתר דרגמו יתהון באבניא, after they stoned them with stones.  Thus we read in Exodus 34:4, and he hewed two tables of stone like unto the first, and Moses rose up early in the morning, וַיַּ֙עַל֙ אֶל־הַ֣ר סִינַ֔י כַּאֲשֶׁ֛ר צִוָּ֥ה יְהוָ֖ה אֹת֑וֹ וַיִּקַּ֣ח בְּיָד֔וֹ שְׁנֵ֖י לֻחֹ֥ת אֲבָנִֽים׃, and he went up into mount Sinai, as Jehovah had commanded him, and he had taken, καὶ ἔλαβε, and he took, in the Septuagint, that is, AFTER he had taken in his hand the two tables of stone:  in which manner the hasty judgment of LE CLERC concerning disturbed order vanishes. Likewise, in verse 33, וַיְכַל, and Moses finished speaking with them, וַיִּתֵּן, and he had given upon his face, and he had imposed upon his face, that is, AFTER he had imposed a veil upon his face, in comparison with verses 34, 35.  In Amos 7:9, and the high places of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be reduced to wilderness, וְקַמְתִּי, and I will rise, Drusius translates, after I will have risen up against the house of Jeroboam with the sword.  Perhaps it is thus to be read in the midst of Zechariah 3:5, וַיָּשִׂימוּ, and they set a clean mitre upon his head, וַיַּלְבִּשֻׁהוּ, and they had clothed, or after they had clothed him with garments, by comparison with verse 4:  see the Commentarium of MARCKIUS and the notas of MICHAELIS.  This Hebraism CONSTANTIN L’EMPEREUR[2] also recognizes in his notis ad Middoth, page 69, although perhaps less opportunely he applies the same to the text in 1 Samuel 7:6, judging that the ו/and in וַיָּצוּמוּ, and they fasted, here signifies after.  BOCHART likewise establishes this use of the particle ו/and, Hierozoico, part I, book III, chapter X, column 823, although again we are unwilling to undertake to support the application of this manner of speaking to the text in Genesis 49:27, concerning which MARCKIUS is to be consulted in his ad præcipuas quasdem partes Pentateuchi:  but this even now does not so much make for our matter.  Thus BOCHART:  “In Genesis 49:27, Benjamin is a ravening wolf.  In the morning he eats the prey, and at evening he divides the spoil.  Which two times there signify, not the entire day, as they maintain, but the entire night, of which one part is evening, and the other morning.  And so the copula AND here is Ordinative, and it is the same as after, as if the Prophet had said:  The Tribe of Benjamin shall be like a rapacious wolf, which has prey to be eaten unto the morning time, after he divided that about the time of the evening.  For the division of the prey is prior to the eating of it.  Such also is Joshua 7:25, and they burned them with fire, and stoned them with stones, that is,בתר דרגימו, after they had stoned them, as it is found in the Chaldean.  Job 14:10, and man dies, וַיֶּחֱלָשׁ, and is weakened, that is, after he has been weakened.”  4.  It is added that Mark makes use of the aorist tense of the verb σταυρόω, to crucify, καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν, and they crucified Him.  Now, the Aorist in the New Testament is known often to come in the place of the pluperfect.  PASOR^[3] observes this, Grammatica Græca sacra Novi Testamenti, book I, chapter XXIII, number 9, page 235.  Thus we read in Mark 16:14, καὶ ὠνείδισε τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν καὶ σκληροκαρδίαν, ὅτι τοῖς θεασαμένοις αὐτὸν ἐγηγερμένον οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν, and He reproved their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those that had seen[4] Him raised.  John 7:39, οὔπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον, ὅτι ὁ Ἰησοῦς οὐδέπω ἐδοξάσθη, for the Holy Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.[5]  Hebrews 1:3, δι᾽ ἑαυτοῦ καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ, etc., when He had purged[6] our sins, He sat down, etc.  In the history of our Lord’s Passion the Aorist similarly occurs as to be taken in the pluperfect tense, John 18:14, ἦν δὲ Καϊάφας ὁ συμβουλεύσας, now Caiaphas was he, who had given counsel,[7] τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις, ὅτι συμφέρει ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ἀπολέσθαι ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ, to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people, in comparison with John 11:49, 50.  Likewise, John 18:24, ἀπέστειλεν οὖν αὐτὸν ὁ Ἄννας, now, Annas had sent[8] Him, δεδεμένον πρὸς Καϊάφαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα, bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.  And in verse 26, λέγει εἷς ἐκ τῶν δούλων τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, συγγενὴς ὢν οὗ ἀπέκοψε Πέτρος τὸ ὠτίον, one of the servants of the high priest, being a relative of him whose ear Peter had cut off,[9] saith.  Likewise, Matthew 27:37, καὶ ἐπέθηκαν, and he had set up,[10] ἐπάνω τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ τὴν αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένην, over His head His accusation written, if you compare verses 35, 36.  And also, in Matthew 27:35 and Mark 15:24, the participle of the aorist σταυρώσαντες signifies, after they had crucified.[11]  Also, Mark 15:15, φραγελλώσας, after they had scourged.  5.  In addition, it is to be observed that Mark in this brief verse makes use of two verbs, the one in the imperfect, the other in first aorist, ἦν δὲ ὥρα τρίτη, καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν:  but if the latter verb was not to be translated they had crucified, but they were crucifying, why, I ask, when ἦν, it was, precedes in the Imperfect, does not ἐσταύρουν follow correspondingly in the Imperfect?  Certainly Mark would not change the tense of the verb in this brief pericope without reason.  The same construction of speech plainly occurs in John 7:39, already cited,[12] where the same distinction in signification also comes to be observed between the verb of the Imperfect tense, ἦν, He was, and the verb of the first Aorist, ἐδοξάσθη, He had been glorified.  6.  But if, in addition to all these things, we should be able to bring in a probable reason why the soldiers waited for three hours after the crucifixion to divide His garments; hardly anything else could be desired in order to value this opinion above all the others.  Which we would not soon abandon, even if the reason for this matter did not occur to us, as it frequently happens in the circumstances of the sacred history.  But here, not without a great appearance of truth, it is conjectured that the soldiers were delayed for so long a time, before they might divide the Lord’s garments; because, before they had completely finished what things were pertaining to the Crucifixion of the Lord and of the two thieves, that darkness spread, which endured through the three hours:  which unusual phenomenon was able to strike these soldiers with fear and bewilderment, uncertain as to what might follow upon this matter; who, being accordingly astonished, sat, keeping watch over the crucified, until by degrees the darkness was dispelled again and the ordinary light returned, when they divided the garments of our crucified Lord among themselves:  consult Matthew 27:54; 28:4; Luke 23:47, 48.

[1] Christian Nolde (1626-1683) was a professor of theology at Copenhagen.  He published his Concordantias Particularum Hebræo-Chaldaicarum in 1679.

[2] Constantin l’Empereur (1591-1648) was a Dutch Hebraist and Orientalist.  He served as Professor of Hebrew and Theology at Harderwijk (1619-1627), and then at Leiden. 

[3] Georgius Pasor (1570-1637) was a Reformed theologian and learned philologist; he served as Professor of Theology at Herborn (1607-1626) and Professor of Greek at Franeker (1626-1637).

[4] Θεασαμένοις is aorist in form, but clearly pluperfect in sense.

[5] Ἐδοξάσθη is aorist in form, but pluperfect in sense.

[6] Ποιησάμενος is aorist in form, but clearly pluperfect in sense.

[7] Συμβουλεύσας is aorist in form, but pluperfect in sense.

[8] Ἀπέστειλεν is aorist in form, but pluperfect in sense.

[9] Ἀπέκοψε is aorist in form, but pluperfect in sense.

[10] Ἐπέθηκαν is aorist in form, but pluperfect in sense.

[11] Matthew 27:35:  “And they crucified him (σταυρώσαντες δὲ αὐτόν, or, and after they had crucified him), and parted his garments, casting lots:  that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.”  So also Mark 15:24.

[12] John 7:39b:  “…for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified (οὔπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον, ὅτι ὁ Ἰησοῦς οὐδέπω ἐδοξάσθη).”