This verse is quoted in the N. T., Matt. xiii. 14, Mark iv. 12, Luke viii. to, John xii. 40, Acts xxviii. 26, 27. Cf. Rom. xi. 8. ’s text agrees practically with the LXX. Compare also Jerem. v. 21 Ezek. xii. 2.

10. βαρέος ἤκουσαν] They are dull of hearing; perhaps with a hint of their unwillingness, as βαρ. ἀκούειν in Xenoph. Anab. 11. 1 is ‘to hear with ’ cf. βαρέως φέρειν.

καμμύω=καταμύω, Aristoph. Vesp. 92.

καὶ ἰάσομαι] ἰάσωμαι, 24 109 306; in the N.T. quotations, the later Mss. generally in Matt., John, Acts have ἰάσωμαι, but the principal uncials ἰάσομαι. On the passage in Acts, Mr T. E. Page says: “The fut. ind. after μὴ represents the action of the verb as more vividly realized as possible and probable than is the case when the subj. follows. The change from the subj. to the ind. here is very forcible and vigorous.” It is, however, probably due, in the first place, to literal representation of the Hebrew, here the “converted” perfect, equivalent to the imperfect or future. The Greek translator may, it is true, have felt καὶ to have some such force as is expressed in English by ‘in which case....’ Cf. the use of ἵνα with past indic. in Greek; though it is not suggested that the parallel is exact: as in Eurip. frag. 442 φεῦ φεῦ τὸ μὴ τὰ πράγματ’ ἀνθρώποις ἔχεινφωνήν, ἶν’ ἦσαν μηδὲν οἱ δεινοὶ λόγοι (71.1. λέγειν), i.e. ‘in which case cunning words would have been. . . .’

Prof. Jebb, however, on Soph. 0. T. 1389, contends that the use of μὴ proves ἵνα to be here “essentially final.”