1 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of previous action(s) in the narrative.
2 sn Note how the author distinguishes healing from exorcism here, implying that the two are not identical.
3 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.
4 sn Why Jesus would not permit the demons to speak is much discussed. Two possibilities are (1) the mere source of the testimony (demonic) and (2) that the title, with its political implications, may have had elements that Jesus wished to avoid until the full nature of his mission was clarified.
5 tc The
6 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the shift from the thoughts of the experts in the law to Jesus’ response.
7 tn Grk “they were thus reasoning within themselves.”
8 tn Grk “Why are you reasoning these things in your hearts?”
11 tn Grk “by [the measure] with which you measure it will be measured to you.”
16 tn Grk “ran together on foot.” The idea of συντρέχω (suntrecw) is “to come together quickly to form a crowd” (L&N 15.133).
17 tn Or “cities.”
18 tc The translation here follows the reading προῆλθον (prohlqon, “they preceded”), found in א B (0187) 892 2427 pc lat co. Some
21 tn Or “mistaken” (cf. BDAG 822 s.v. πλανάω 2.c.γ).
26 tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”
31 tn Grk “he denied it, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant in English and has not been translated.
32 tn Grk “I do not know or understand what you are saying.” In the translation this is taken as a hendiadys (a figure of speech where two terms express a single meaning, usually for emphatic reasons).
33 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.
34 tc Several important witnesses (א B L W Ψ* 579 892 2427 pc) lack the words “and a rooster crowed.” The fact that such good and early Alexandrian witnesses lack these words makes this textual problem difficult to decide, especially because the words receive support from other witnesses, some of which are fairly decent (A C D Θ Ψc 067 Ë1,13 33 [1424] Ï lat). The omission could have been intentional on the part of some Alexandrian scribes who wished to bring this text in line with the other Gospel accounts that only mention a rooster crowing once (Matt 26:74; Luke 22:60; John 18:27). The insertion could be an attempt to make the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy in 14:30 more explicit. Internally, the words “and a rooster crowed” fit Mark’s Gospel here, not only in view of 14:30, “before a rooster crows twice,” but also in view of the mention of “a second time” in 14:71 (a reading which is much more textually secure). Nevertheless, a decision is difficult.