[26] Lücke, 1, s. 435 ff.; De Wette, exeg. Handb. 1, 1, s. 174 f.; i. 3, s. 40. [↑]
[27] Ut sup. s. 109; comp. Schneckenburger, s. 26 f. [↑]
[28] Lightfoot, s. 632, from Bab. Jevamoth, f. vi. 2. [↑]
[30] Lücke, s. 437; Sieffert, s. 110. [↑]
[31] Comm. in Joh. tom. 10, § 17; Opp. 1, p. 322, ed. Lommatzsch. [↑]
[33] Bretschneider, Probab. p. 43. [↑]
[34] English Commentators, ap. Lücke, 1, s. 435 f., Anm. [↑]
[35] Eng. Comm. ap. Lücke. According to Neander (s. 387, Anm.), Jesus, after his last entrance into Jerusalem, when the enthusiasm of the populace was on his side, must have shunned every act that could be interpreted into a design of using external force, and thus creating disturbances. But he must equally have shunned this at the beginning, as at the end, of his career, and the proceeding in the temple was rather a provocation of external force against himself, than a use of it for his own purposes. [↑]