ix. 52-56. “It is impossible to suppose that the shorter form of the text is the original, and the longer due to a later interpolation, as this would imply what is incredible—viz., that one of Marcion’s most antinomian readings found its way into a large number of Catholic manuscripts (D, the Peshitto, Harklean Syriac, most Latin witnesses, Chrysostom, etc.). The only probable explanation is that the Catholic writers objected to 54_b_ and 55_b_ on account of the use made of them by the Marcionites, and the apparently Marcionitic character of their contents. They were particularly offensive when taken together. Accordingly, some manuscripts like e and Syr^{cu} omitted only 54_b_, others, like A C, only 55_b_, while others again, like B L Syr^{sin}, boldly omitted both.... The words were written by Luke and not invented by Marcion.” Zahn, _GK._, i. 681, ii. 468; _Einl._, ii. 357. x. 1. Instead of 70, B D, Tatian, the Syriac, and the Latin give 72. According to Zahn, the number has nothing to do with the Jewish enumeration of 70 Gentile nations, languages, or angels, nor the 70 members of the Sanhedrim, the 70 translators of the Old Testament, or with any other number 70. These 70 were not sent to the Gentiles, and Luke gives no hint of the allegorical significance of their number. Any such allegorizing was foreign both to himself and Theophilus, neither of whom was a Jew. See _Einl._, ii. 392. xi. 2. On βαττολογεῖν ὡς οἱ λοιποί in D, see my _Philologica Sacra_, pp. 27-36. xi. 3. There is a certain amount of probability in Zahn’s view that Marcion was led to insert σοῦ after ἄρτος ἐπιούσιος by thinking of John vi. 33 f., a passage which suggested itself to Origen also in this connection. See Zahn (_GK._, i. 677, ii. 471), who thinks it probable that Marcion interpreted the words in a spiritual sense (= _supersubstantialis_). xi. 53. The text of D here displays several marked variations, which, however, do not affect the sense of the passage. Zahn sees in them the arbitrary alterations of a later time; but Weiss thinks that in some particulars they may preserve the original. xii. 1. Marcion, seemingly, and Jerome omit πρῶτον, which is attested by most of the Old Latin witnesses, with the exception of b. See Zahn, _GK._, i. 692, ii. 474. xii. 14. The words ἢ μεριστὴν were omitted by Marcion (Zahn, _GK._, i. 682). They are also wanting in the Sinai-Syriac (see Lewis, _Some Pages_). xii. 38. The mention of the ἑσπερινὴ φυλακὴ by Marcion and other authorities is due, according to Zahn (_GK._, ii. 683; _Einl._, ii. 356), to the “magisterial consideration” that an orderly householder would not come home from the festivities after midnight or in the early hours of the morning, but at the latest in the first watch of the night, which was still called the evening. The reading is also found in Irenæus, but not in the Sinai-Syriac.