SUPPLEMENTS TO
NOVUM TESTAMENTUM EDITORIAL BOARD
President: W.
C. VAN UNNIK. Bilthoven (Utr.) Netherlands
P. BRATSIOTIS
A.
K. W. CLARK H. CLAVIER J. W. DOEVE
W.
J. DORESSE
Bo REICKE
C.
W.
DOM
GROSSOUW
A. F. J KLIJN H. MENOUD
PH.
K. H.
DUGMORE
J.
GEYSER
DUPONT O.S.B.
E.
STAUFFER
VOLUME XVIII
LEIDEN
E.
RENGSTORF
P. SCHUBERT
J.
BRILL 19 67
THE USE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN ST. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE MESSIANIC HOPE
BY
ROBERT HORTON GUNDRY
LEIDEN
E.
J. BRILL I967
Copyright 1967 by E. I. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or translated in any form, by print, phOotoprint, microfilm or any other means without written permission from the publisher PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS
TO LOIS, MY WIFE
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
Acknowledgements.
ix
Abstract . . . . .
xi
List of Abbreviations.
xv
Introduction . . . .
I
THE TEXT-FoRM OF THE MATTHAEAN QUOTATIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
1. Examination of the Text-Form. . . . . . Formal Quotations in common with Mark. Allusive Quotations in common with Mark Formal Quotations in common with Luke. Allusive Quotations in common with Luke Formal Quotations Peculiar to Matthew . Allusive Quotations Peculiar to Matthew . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II. Explanation of the Text-Form . . Documentary-Redactional Views Torrey's Metrical Hebrew. . . . Kilpatrick's Liturgical-Homiletical Hypothesis Stendahl's School of St. Matthew . . Lindars' New Testament Apologetic . The Testimony Book. . . . . . Kahle's Written Greek Targums. . . Matthew the Targumist. . . . . . . The Language Situation Presupposed by the Matthaean Quotations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications for the Synoptic Problem and the Origin of Matthew. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9 9 28 66 69 89 I27 I47 ISI ISI IS2 IS3 ISS IS9 I63 I66 I72 I74 I78
VIn
TABLE OF CONTENTS THE MATTHAEAN ARGUMENT FROM THE FULFILMENT OF MESSIANIC PROPHECY
III. The Question of Historicity. . . . . . .
l89 l89
Historical Pessimism and the Form-Critical Method. The Effect of the Fulfilment-Motif on the Evangelic Tradition. . . . . . . 193 IV. The Problem of Legitimacy. . . . . . . . . . .
205
Matthaean Hermeneutics and the Messianic Hope Modern Hermeneutics and the Messianic Hope.
205 215
Bibliography .
235
Author Index.
24l
Index of Scripture References
248
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This book is a Ph.D. dissertation presented to and accepted by the University of Manchester in the spring of I96I and brought up to date in the summer of I964. I express my gratitude to Professor F. F. Bruce, who supervised my research, to Mr. P. R. Weis, who graciously allowed me to peruse photographs of the as yet unpublished Codex Neofiti I of the Old Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch in the Vatican Library, to Dr. W. H. Chaloner, who counselled me in my course of study at the University of Manchester, to my former mentor Dr. Marchant King, and most of all to my wife, who first encouraged me to undertake this work and who typed the rough draft of the thesis. The time devoted to this study was made financially possible through the Laymen's Scholarship Fund, administered by the Los Angeles Baptist College and Seminary, and through the generosity of others. To them I give my thanks. I also express my appreciation for the assistance given me by the librarians and their assistants at the University of Manchester, The John Rylands Library, the University of Edinburgh, the National Library of Scotland, the University of Basel, the University of Tiibingen, Westmont College, and Fuller Theological Seminary. Finally, I am indebted to E. J. Brill Publishers for their undertaking the publication of this volume, and to the editor of the Journal of Biblical Literature for permission to use material from my article which appeared in vol. 83 (I963), pp. 404ff., of that journal. Robert H. Gundry Westmont College Santa Barbara, California
ABSTRACT A re-examination of the OT quotations in Mt is needed because of the neglect in past examinations of the allusive quotations, because of our present knowledge from the Dead Sea Scrolls that allusive quotation of the OT was a conscious literary practice, and because of the bewildering variety of hypotheses advanced to account for the Matthaean quotations. Formal quotations which Mt shares with Mk are almost purely Septuagintal. In all other strata of synoptic quotation materialformal and allusive, Marcan, Lucan, and peculiarly Matthaeanthe text-form is very mixed, showing contacts with the Hebrew, the Targums, the LXX, the OT Peshitta, Theodotion (in Dan), rabbinic tradition, and apocryphal literature. This mixture stands in contrast to the prevailingly Septuagintal form of OT quotations throughout the rest of the NT. Thus, the inclusion of allusive quotations leads to two new and important discoveries: first, contrary to former opinion, the Matthaean formula-citations do not stand out from the other synoptic quotations in their mixed text-form; second, the formal quotations in the Marcan tradition stand out in their adherence to the LXX. Redactional theories about the origin of Mt mistakenly treat the formula-citations as a textually distinctive group. The view of C. C. Torrey that the quotations in Aramaic Mt stood in metrical Hebrew stumbles against the non-Marcan Septuagintal quotations and parts of quotations. The liturgical-homiletical hypothesis of G. D. Kilpatrick does not explain the text-form of the Matthaean quotations, for if Septuagintal and non-Septuagintal quotations can derive from the homiletical tradition, they can equally well derive from the first evangelist himself and no need for the liturgicalhomiletical hypothesis then exists. K. Stendahl's argument for a Matthaean school similar to the Qumran community again mistakenly regards the formula-citations as a textually distinctive group, largely through neglect of the allusive quotations. Lindars' treatment shares this neglect. The Testimony Book hypothesis has been partially confirmed by the discovery of Qumran testimonia, but offers no help in explaining the text-form of the quotations in Mt. The abundance of non-Septuagintal Greek Targums ad-
XII
ABSTRACT
vocated by P. Kahle could not explain non-Septuagintal quotations unless it could be proved the NT author was incapable of translating the Hebrew and of utilizing other Semitic textual tradition. But the higher the number of Greek translations of the OT that can be proved, the greater the likelihood a NT author could and would translate for himself. Since the church emerged from the synagogue, in which the practice of targumizing prevailed, it is best to say that the first evangelist utilized a number of textual traditions in a targumic manner. The mixture of Septuagintal, Hebrew, and Aramaic elements in synoptic quotations harmonizes perfectly with the trilingual milieu now known from archaeological data to have existed in first century Palestine. The Septuagintal form of formal Marcan quotations implies a Hellenistic strain, to which agrees the tradition that Mk was a Roman gospel. The taking over of these quotations by Mt confirms the dependence of Mt upon Mk. But the mixed text in other quotations throughout all three synoptics (including allusive Marcan quotations) points to a common tradition behind all three, not merely a Q behind Mt and Lk or Lucan dependence on Mt. An Aramaic Ur-Mt is excluded by the Septuagintal element as deeply embedded in the tradition as the Semitic elements. The only hypothesis with enough flexibility to meet the requirements is that a body of loose notes stands behind the bulk of the synoptic tradition. The wide use of shorthand and the carrying of notebooks in the Graeco-Roman world, the school practice of circulating lecture notes and utilizing them in published works, and the later transmission of rabbinic tradition through shorthand notes support this hypothesis. As a former publican, the Apostle Matthew would have been admirably fitted to fill a position of note-taker in the band of uneducated apostles. That the same peculiar mixed text occurs in the quotations obviously due to the first evangelist and in the other quotations throughout the synoptics suggests the same hand is behind both. These suggestions support the early date and the historical worth of the synoptic tradition. An examination of the effect which the fulfilment-motif exercised on the tradition shows a conforming of descriptive phraseology to OT language, but not a creative influence. With some modification and extension, the text-plots indicated by C. H. Dodd as areas of the OT on which Christian exegesis concentrated fit not only formal, but also allusive quota-
ABSTRACT
XIII
tions. This fact and the naturalness with which the Matthaean quotations fall under easily recognizable principles of interpretation demonstrate that Matthaean hermeneutics were not atomizingin contrast to Qumran and rabbinical literature. That every principle of interpretation is exhibited in quotations occurring on the lips of Jesus suggests he himself was the author of this new and coherent method of OT exegesis. An examination of the Messianic hope from the side of OT scholarship shows that that hope arose in pre-exilic times. The OT passages interpreted in Mt as directly Messianic are found to be so. Thus, specific fulfilments of individual Messianic prophecies provide a basis for the broader Christian view of the divine purpose guiding OT history toward Jesus Christ.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Anger
A &G
BA BASOR BDB
BibSac BJRL BI-D BZ CBQ DLZ DSS esp. ET HDB HDCG HTR HUCA ICC IDB IF JAOS JBL JSS JTS Karnetzki Lindars L &S
LXX MPG MPL
Anger, R. Ratio, qua loci Veteris Testamenti in evangelio M atthaei laudantur, quid valeat ad iltustrandam huius evangelii originem, quaeritur. (Leipziger Programme I-III.) Leipzig, 1861-62. Arndt, W. F., and Gingrich, F. W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, 1957. Biblical Archaeologist. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament with an A ppendix containing the Biblical A ramaic. Based on the lexicon of W. Gesenius as translated by E. Robinson and edited by F. Brown with the co-operation of S. R. Driver and C. Briggs. Oxford, 1929. Bibliotheca Sacra. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library. Blass, F., and Debrunner, A. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Gottingen, 1954. Biblische Zeitschrift. Catholic Biblical Quarterly. Deutsche Literaturzeitung. Dead Sea Scrolls. especially. Expository Times. A Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by J. Hastings. 5 vols. Edinburgh, 1898-1904. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. Edited by J. Hastings. 2 vols. Edinburgh, 1906. Harvard Theological Review. Hebrew Union College Annual. International Critical Commentary. Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. New York, 1962. introductory formulate). Journal of the American Oriental Society. Journal of Biblical Literature. J o~wnal of Semitic Studies. Journal of Theological Studies. Karnetzki, M. "Die alttestamentlichen Zitate in der synoptischen Tradition." Dissertation; Tiibingen, 1955. Lindars, B. New Testament Apologetic. Philadelphia, 1961. Liddell, H., and Scott, R. A Greek-English Lexicon. 2 vols. New edition revised and augmented throughout by H. S. Jones with the assistance of R. McKenzie. Oxford, 1940. Septuagint. Patrologiae cursus completus . ... Series Graeca .... Accurante J .-P. Migne. Paris, 1858-88. Patrologiae cursus completus . ... Series Latina . ... Accurante J.-P. Migne. Paris, 1844-1904.
XVI
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
MS(S) MT
n. NovTest NT NTS OT par PEQ RB RGG
RHR SJT Stendahl Theo!. Stud. u. Krit. TLZ TWNT
VT ZAW ZDMG ZNW ZTK ZWT
= =
manuscript(s). Massoretic Text. note Novum Testamentum. New Testament. New Testament Studies. Old Testament. parallel (s ) Palestine Exploration Quarterly. Revue Biblique. Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. 2. Auf!. Tiibingen, 1927-31. 3. Auf!. Tiibingen, 1957.-. Revue de I' histoire des religions. Scottish Journal of Theology. Stendahl, K. The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament. (Acta Seminarii Neotestamentici Upsaliensis, XX.) Uppsala, 1954.
Theologische Studien und Kritiken. Theologische Literaturzeitung. Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament. Begriindet von G. Kittel und herausgegeben von G. Friedrich. Stuttgart, 1933.-. Vetus Testamentum. Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft. Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenliindischen Gesellschaft. Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft. Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche. Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Theologie.
N.B.: Commentaries are cited by the author and the abbreviation of the book of the Bible on which the commentary is based. Biblical references follow the book-titles of the English Bible and OT references follow the chapter and verse divisions in Kittel-Kahle, Biblia Hebraica, except where otherwise indicated. The generally accepted abbreviations for the books of the Bible are self-evident.
INTRODUCTION 1 Within the last decade the quotations of the OT in Mt, particularly the "formula-quotations" (Reflexionscitate) , have received such varied treatment as to be made the basis of a Matthaean "school" which practiced pesher-type exegesis similar to that displayed in the Qumran documents, II and minimized to the point of denial that Mt is a Jewish-Christian gospel. 3 Between these extremeR, they have been regarded as one layer in multi-stage redactional theories concerning the composition of Mt,' translations into Greek of originally metrical Hebrew,5 oral homiletical tradition,6 traces of a Testimony Book, either incorporated into the first gospel 7 or constituting in large measure the format of the first gospel,B and remnants of Jewish Greek targums which were in use 1 For a more detailed survey of ~studies in Mt outside the province of OT quotations, see P. Nepper-Christensen, Das Matthausevangelium, ein judenchristliches Evangelium? (Aarhus, 1958), 13-36. 2 K. Stendahl, The School of St. Matthew (Uppsala, 1954). 3 Nepper-Christensen, op. cU., esp. 136-162. For a critical review, see P. Benoit, RB, 66 (1959), 438-440. Since N.-Chr. simply ignores much of the OT and Jewish substratum of Mt, his thesis does not demand detailed refutation. His argument that Mt's use of the OT is exceeded in the Gospel of John (where N.-Chr. numbers fifteen fulfilment-citations) takes into account neither the penetration of OT language into the first gospel much deeper than the formula-citations nor the possibility that the fulfilmentcitations in Jn reflect, if not a Jewish destination, at least a Jewish background (cf. the new light thrown upon the fourth gospel from the Dead Sea Scrolls). , A. Resch, A ussercanonische Parattettexte zu den Evangelien (Leipzig, 1897), II, 20-28; W. Soltau, ZNW, I (1900), 219-248, esp. 224; idem, Unsere Evangelien (Leipzig, 1901), 55 f.; B. W. Bacon, Studies in Mt (London, 1930), 156-164,47°, 475f.; W. L. Knox, Sources of the Synoptic Gospels (Cambridge, 1957), II, 12Iff.; P. Parker, The Gospel before Mark (Chicago, 1953), 90ff. 5 C. C. Torrey, Documents of the Primitive Church (New York, 1941), 41-90. a G. D. Kilpatrick, The Origins of the Gospel according to St. Mt (Oxford, 1946), 56£· 7 W. C. Allen, ET, 12 (1900/01), 284f.; F. C. Burkitt, The Gospel History and Its Transmission (Edinburgh, 1906), 124-128; V. H. Stanton, The Gospels as Historical Documents (Cambridge, 1909), II, 342ff.; A. H. McNeile, Mt (London, 1915), p. xi; J. R. Harris, Testimonies (Cambridge, 1916), I, 124ff.; T. W. Manson, BJRL, 34 (1951/52), 323; R. M. Grant, The Letter and the Spirit (London, 1957), 46; F. C. Grant, The Gospels: Their Origin and Growth (London, 1957), 65. 8 J. B. Gregory, The Oracles ascribed to Mt by Papias (London, 1894); E. C. Selwyn, The Oracles in the NT (London, 1912), pp. vii, 396-427;
2
INTRODUCTION
prior to Christian standardization of the LXX.l The traditional view that Mt directly translated and targumized the Hebrew text has recently been restated by M. Karnetzki. 2 The very abundance of hypotheses attempting to account for the peculiarities of the Matthaean quotations requires a restudy of the whole matter. Yet another factor is of even greater importance: the neglect in previous studies of the aU~tsive quotations and their text-form. There exists in the synoptic tradition, and pre-eminently in Mt, a large body of allusive quotations in which the language is only colored by the ~T. These have been passed over as of little importance for two reasons: It is felt that allusive quotations can have been made only from memory, so that textual variants cannot be considered significant. 3 However, the role of oral tradition in the textual history of the OT (and in the whole Semitic culture) was greater than we are sometimes prone to think,' so that the ancient mode of recitation produced "vivantes concordances de l'Ancien Testament." 6 Furthermore, easy access to synagogue scrolls as well as private possession of copies of individual OT books rendered complete reliance on memory unnecessary. 6 Many of even the minor divergences from T. H. Bindley, Church Quarterly Review. 84 (1917). 41; J. A. Findlay. The Expositor. 20, 8th Series (1920), 388-400; idem, Jesus in the First Gospel (London, 1925), 7; B. P. W. Stather Hunt, Primitive Gospel Sources (London, 1951), 10lf., 149f., 182-193, 319-322. 1 P. E. Kahle, The Cairo Genizah z (Oxford, 1959), 165.238, 249ff.; A. Sperber [with variations], JBL, 59 (1940), 193-293; cf. A. Baumstark, Biblica,37 (1956), 296-313. a Karnetzki, 255ff. 3 Cf. F. Johnson, The Quotations o/the New Testament/rom the Old (London, 1896), 2,29ff., citing the unwieldiness of scrolls and their lack of chapter and verse divisions. , See H. S. Nyberg, ZAW, I I (1934), 243f. Cf. the oral transmission of Rabbinic law and the prohibition against reading the targums (B. J. Roberts. The OT Text and Versions [Cardiff. 1951], 19: E. Wiirthwein, The Text of the OT [Oxford, 1957],57; J. F. Stenning, The Targum of Is [Oxford, 1949]. p. vii). At the same time, the Dead Sea Scrolls have taught us not to exaggerate the influence of oral tradition on the aT text. & J. Bonsirven, Exegese rabbinique et exegese paulinienne (Paris, 1939), 337. Recitation is relevant with relation to written documents inasmuch as readers in the ancient world pronounced aloud the words as they read them. See J. Balogh, Philologus, 82 (1926/27), 84-109,202-240. 8 See W. O. E. Oesterley, The Jewish Background of the Christian Liturgy (Oxford, 1925), IlIff.; C. W. Dugmore, The Influence of the Synagogue upon the Divine Office (Oxford, 1944).71; Acts 17 : II; Lk 2 : 46f.; In 5: 39; I Tim 4: 13; II Tim 4: 13.
INTRODUCTION
3
the LXX in NT quotations of the OT appear to be deliberate. 1 Sometimes NT writers verbally agree against all known OT texts, a coincidence which cannot be accounted for by memory-quotation. 2 Key words in the LXX would hardly have been forgotten. Some of the words in the LXX hardly had adequate alternative renderings, yet even these are sometimes replaced. One remembers a quotation because of its attractiveness, yet this lies in the wording.3 For these reasons memory-citation explains textual variants in allusive quotations no more than it does in formal quotations. Again, it is felt that allusions are not based on any attempt to cite the OT accurately; i.e., the very allusiveness makes for a carelessness in text-form, this being so especially in the high-flown language of apocalyptic.' Apart from the uncertainty in judging isolated sayings as "apocalyptic" 5 and although allowance must be made for the working of an allusion into the context, with resultant changes in grammatical forms, an allusive quotation rather reflects the lang~tage and phrase-forms with which the writer is most familiar and in which he habitually thinks-all the more so in the case of Jewish authors, whose education from childhood was steeped in OT lore. 6 One might almost say that allusive quotations are more revealing than formal quotations, for "the least direct allusion testifies to the firmest grasp and appreciation of a subject." 7 . Above all, recent researches in the Qumran scrolls have shown that in the NT period the interweaving of scriptural phraseology and one's own words was a conscious literary method. 8 This mosaic 1 This is, e.g., the central thesis of "The Use of the Septuagint in the Epistle to the Hebrews" by K. J. Thomas (unpublished thesis presented to the University of Manchester, 1959). a Mt II: 10; Mk I: 2j Lk 7: 27 with Mal 3: Ij I Pet 2: 6j Ro 9: 33 with Is 28: 16. See J. Scott, Principles of NT Quotation (Edinburgh, 1877), 93. 8 See Hunt, op. cit., Isof. , So Stendahl, 143, IS8f. Stendahl wishes to discount the allusive quotatiens which vary from the LXX in order to put the Matthaean formulaquotations, on which he bases his thesis, in a class by themselves. See below, ISSff. 6 On the nebulousness of this term, see H. Gunkel, Schopfung u. Chaos (Gottingen, 1895). 290j B. Vawter, CBQ, 22 (1960), 33f. 8 See Tholuck, BibSac, II (1854),583 j E. C. S. Gibson, The OT in the New (London, 1907), 3ff. 7 C. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law (Cambridge, 1869). p. xxi. For a remarkable illustration of an OT passage influencing the thought and vocabulary of a NT author, see E. G. King, The Expositor, 10, 3rd Series (1889), 233ff.-on I Cor I: 18f. Cf. W. Manson, Jesus the Messiah (London, 1948), 81f. B In the non -Biblical texts "we rarely find a whole or even a half-verse,
4
INTRODUCTION
style flourished in Jewish writings of the Middle Ages and of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. 1 M. Wallenstein has shown that in spite of the extremely allusive nature of such OT quotations, variant readings in the Piyyut often go with the versions. 2 The work of Rabin,s M. H. Gottstein,' P. Wernberg-M!2Sller,fi and J. Carmignac 6 has now demonstrated that Biblical allusions in the Zadokite documents, the Manual of Discipline, the Hodayoth, and the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness contain variant readings which agree with one or more against the others of the MT, Targum, LXX, OT Peshitta, Vulgate, and Old Latin. These variants cannot all be put down to the allusiveness of the quotations or to poor memory, for the same variant readings sometimes occur in different Qumran manuscripts and the same variant characteristics appear in explicit quotations.? We must therefore reckon with the text-form of the allusive quotations for a comprehensive view of the synoptic quotation material. Several observations about OT allusions in Mt are pertinent. We can hardly think that a writer who introduces such out-of-the-way citations as, e.g., Hos II:I (2:6) would not have known the OT well enough to have recognized allusive quotations in the tradition upon which he worked. We are therefore justified in looking for his treatment of the OT text here as well as in formal citations. The far greater number of OT allusions in Mt, many of them introduced into the common synoptic tradition, confirms this judgment, as do also the frequently met circumstances in which repetition of the OT phraseology occurs within the OT itself or in the NT outside the gospels, showing a certain fixity of expression. In such cases we are usually safe in seeing conscious allusion to the OT. Deciding whether an instance of verbal parallelism between OT and NT really constitutes an allusive quotation often presents a delicate task. There is no rule of thumb which will fit all cases. but mostly only mere splinters of verses. .. it is natural to find not only single words but idioms and phrases from the O.T. used in them" (C. Rabin, JTS, 6 [1955], 174; cf. idem, The Zadokite Documents· [Oxford, 1958], p. ix). 1 Ibid. • BJRL, 34 (1952 ), 474ff. 3 JTS, 6 (1955), 174ff. , VT, 3 (1953), 79-82 . 6 Studia Theologica, 9 (1955), 40-66. • RB, 63 (1956), 234-260, 375-390; Revue de Qumran, Tome 2, NO.7 (19 60 ), 357-394· 7 Rabin, JTS, loco cit.
INTRODUCTION
5
Certainly it is not adequate to require a certain number of parallel words or merely to follow the lists of OT quotations and the boldfaced type in critical editions of the Greek New Testament, commentaries, and other works on the subject, which differ among themselves anyway. In general, the procedure here followed has been not to require a certain number of words, but to require that recognizable thought-connection exist between the OT and NT passages. Some parallel phraseology has been discounted as being due to fortuitously similar circumstances, as, e.g., the flights to Egypt of the Holy Family and Jeroboam (Mt 2:I3-I5; I Kings II:40). A Septuagintal text-form is not to be made a criterion for allusive quotations. Rid of the tacit assumption that it is, we are free to recognize many significant OT allusions. The inclusion or exclusion of some doubtful passages happily does not affect the thesis of this dissertation. 1 The thesis is twofold: (I) contrary to former opinion, the Matthaean formula-citations do not stand out from other synoptic quotation material in their divergence from the LXX, but the formal quotations in the Marcan (and parallel) tradition stand out in their adherence to the LXX; (2) the OT-motif in Mt has led neither to radical alteration of the gospel tradition nor to atomizing exegesis of the ~T. To substantiate this thesis we shall examine in order the text-form of the Matthaean quotations, problems of historicity, and Matthaean hermeneutics. 1 For seizure upon every possible similarity of expression between NT and OT, see E. Hiihn, Die alttest. Citate u. Reminiscenzen im NT (Tiibingen, 1900), and Selwyn, op. cit. The inclusion of doubtful allusions would have but strengthened my argument.
PART ONE
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE MATTHAEAN QUOTATIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT "The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew's Gospel ... "
CHAPTER ONE
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM FORMAL QUOTATIONS IN COMMON WITH MARK
The formal quotations 1 in Mk are almost purely Septuagintaloften slavishly so, and even against the Hebrew text. Mt, however, tends to depart from Mk and the LXX. Mt 3: 3; Mk 1: 3; Lk 3: 4-6 : CPCJ)v~ ~OiiiVTOI; ev Tn epijll<jl· hOLfL&aCXTE: T~V bBbv xuptou, e:66e:tcxl; 1tOLe:!Te: Tal; TPt~oUI; CX6TOU. Mt e:66e:tcxl; ... cx6Tou] om syrSiD Z CX6TOU] TOU Be:ou l)fLiiiv b syrcur Ir (= assimilation to LXX; strictly, syrcur = CXUTOU + TOU Be:ou l)fLiiiv,3 a conflate reading) Lk extends the quotation through Is 40: 5 in abbreviated form. In 1: 23: ~yw CPCJ)v~ ~OiiiVTOI; ev Tn epijfL<jl· e:66UVCXTe: T~V bBbv XUPLOU, xcxBwl; clTt&v 'Hacxtcxl; /) TtPOCPijT71I;. Is 40: 3 LXX = Mt, except TOU Be:ou l)fLiiiv (= MT), instead of CXUTOU. MT: 'l~M'N' M'O~ M~'l1~ "IV~ mM~ 1" '11) ,~,~~ N"i' "1'
The quotation is essentially Septuagintal in form, particularly in its construing "~'~:l with N"i' "1' rather than with '11), in its omission of a phrase corresponding to i1~'11~, and in its possessive construction for '1~i1'}c'. That the syntax of the LXX suits the evangelists' desire to show 1 The distinction between formal and allusive quotations is not always easily made. I have tried to judge by whether the quoted words flow from and into the context (allusive) or stand apart (formal). With this criterion, an allusive quotation may be of some length, i.e., more than a fleeting phrase or two. D A. Merx prefers the shorter reading of syrSiD (Die vier kanonischen Evangelien [Berlin, 1897-19II], II, 32ff.). By its very brevity, however, this text appears to be an instance of Tatianic influence on the Old Syriac. Recent studies by A. Voobus (Studies in the History of the Gospel Text in Syriac [Louvain, 1951]; Early Versions of the NT [Stockholm, 1954], 68f£., 77f£') confirm the contention of H. J. Vogels (Die aitsyrischen Evangelien in ihrem VerhiiZtnis zu Tatians Diatessaron [Freiburg, 19II] and in Synoptische Studien [Wickenhauser Festschrift; Munchen, 1953],278-289) that the Diatessaron preceded the Syriac tetraevangelium and greatly influenced its text (against Zahn, Hjelt, Lewis, Mingana, Torrey, and M. Black). Cf. L. Vaganay, An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the NT (London, 1937). 105£., 108; c. S. C. Williams, ET, 58 (1946/47), 251; A. Wikenhauser, NT Introduction2 (London, 1958), II6. 3 See M. Black, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Oxford, 1946), 73-
IO
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
that even the locality of John's preaching fulfilled prophecy has been unduly pressed. 1 John's call for preparation, the coming of the Lord, and the message of combined salvation and judgment are all leading themes in both the OT and NT passages. The syntax of the LXX is not necessary to the fulfilment-motif, for "if the command was uttered in the desert, it was in order to its being there obeyed or carried into execution ... ." 2 We must also consider the possibility that the MT is wrong in construing ':l"~:l with llEl, since the LXX, Targum, OT Peshitta, 3 Vulgate, and rabbinical expositors construe ':l"~:l with N"P J. Ziegler has gathered a large number of agreements in syntax between the LXX and IQIsa. against the MT,4 so that the accents in the MT must not be considered sacrosanct. Note further that ':l"~:l precedes the verb 'lEl, whereas l'I:l'17:l follows "lV". This inexactness in the supposed parallelism suggests several possibilities: (I) the position of ':l"~:l before '3El points to a connection with N"P "p; (2) l'I:l,17:l was inserted to match ':l"~:l when the latter was misconstrued with '3D (there was no compelling motive for the omission of l'I:l,17:l by the LXX); (3) l'I:l,17:l was a variant for ':l"~:J and inserted as a conflate reading for its preservation, after which the present accents reworked the syntax of the verse (cf. the intentional preservation of variant readings in IQIsa. and the LXX 6). The strange reading l'I~'17:J in IQS viii. 12 ff. may possibly hint at the secondary nature of the word in the text of Is. It is usually thought that the NT tXu't'ou is a Christological adaptation designed to identify Jesus with Yahweh. 6 But since the identification has already been made by application of the verse to Jesus' forerunner, John, tXu't'ou may be merely an abbreviation for 't'oU 6eou ~!L(;)v.
',p.
1 E.g., by A. Loisy, Les evangiles synoptiques (1907), I, 392; W. C. Allen, Mt (Edinburgh, 1907), 23; Stendahl, 48; W. Marxsen, Der Evangelist lvIarkus (G5ttingen, 1956), 20ff.; A. C. Sundberg, Jr., NovTest, 3 (1959), 275f.; J. A. Fitzmyer, NTS, 7 (1961), 318; S. L. Edgar, NTS, 9 (1962 ), 57· B J. A. Alexander, Mt (London, 1861), 50, who also quotes Bengel: "ubi vox ibi auditores." a See F. Delitzsch, Is (Edinburgh, 1884), II, 141; A. Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (Grand Rapids, 1953),': II, 744; W, Michaelis, Mt (Zurich, 1948-49), I, u6. , JBL, 78 (1959), 46 -5°. 5 Ibid., 57. 8 Zahn, Einleitung in das NP (Leipzig, 1899), II, 315; M.-J. Lagrange, Mk' (Paris, 1947), 4; Black, lac. cit.; Stendahl, lac. cit.
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
Mt II: 10 £80u eydl a,XOcrr&AAOO Tbv lJ.yyeMv (.LOU xpb xpoac!l7tou aou, at; XIXTotaXeucXael T~V
o86v aou i!(.Lxpoa6&v aou
Ex 23: 20 LXX £80u eydl a,XOcrr&AAOO Tbv lJ.yyeMv (.Lou xpb xpoacll7tou aou, tVot lpuMl:;n ae ev Tn 08iji
MT '~3N
MlM
"'Ill
1N'~ 1'3D'
1'~1lI' 1"~
Mal 3: I LXX £80u eydl el:;otXOaTtAAOO Tbv lJ.yyeMv (.Lou Xott em~Atl\leTotl 08bv xpb xpoacll7tou (.Lou
II
MT
'33M
"'Ill
'~N'~
MlD'
1"
'3D'
Mt II: 10 ~(.Lxpoa6&v aou] om Dpc it (Mcion?) (= assimilation to Mk) Ex 23: 20 MT 1N'~]'~ - Sam LXX Vg Mal 3: I LXX eyell AQW NCLuc] om BN*C MT '~N'~] 1N'~ K 597 Targ Mk I: 21 = Mt, except Mk omits /f(.Lxpoa6&v aou.. NAWplvgs,Clt; retain eyell; BDepcitvgcoddlr omit eyell. Lk 7: 27 = Mt, except Lk omits eyell. Cf. In 3: 28.
Here is a composite quotation in which the first half agrees with the LXX of Ex 23: 20, and the second half shows a very slight influence from the Hebrew text of Mal 3: I. The combination of these two OT passages is probably pre-Christian, since it occurs in Jewish literature. 2 Since the first clause derives from Ex 23: 20, 6~ is not so much a divergence from the LXX as a grammatical link between the two OT passages. Koc:.cxO'X€UcXO'€L in the gospels rests on the piel of MlD (= MT, as also the hOLllcXO'€L of Theodotion and the cX7toO'X€UcXO'€L of Symmachus), against the LXX's ~7tL~Ae~€'t'cxL, which rests on the kal. The definite article with 030\1 shows the lingering influence of Ex 23: 20, where the article is present with 1" and b36c;,3 as does 1 Some commentators reject Mk I: 2 as a copyist's gloss, partly because of the difficulty in the ascription to Is. See A. E. J. Rawlinson, Mk (London, 1925). 5,250; M.-J. Lagrange, Mt? (Paris, 1948), pp. cxx, cxxii; V. Taylor, Mk (London, 1952). 153; Stendahl, 50ff. a Ex, R. 32. See E. Lohmeyer, Mk (Gottingen, 1937), II; J. Jeremias, TWNT, II, 938. J. Mann shows that the synagogue sermon based on Ex 23: 20 was just as much taken from Mal 3: 1-8, 23f. (The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue [Cincinnati, Ohio, 1940], I, 479). See also Stendahl, loco cit. Why then should we see only a slight influence from Ex 23: 20, with many commentators, when the whole first clause agrees word for word with Ex 23: 20 LXX? 8 Note also the possibility that the Hebrew text of Mal 3: I contained the article with 1". Ziegler notes that IQlsa and the LXX often have the article where it is missing in the MT (op. cit., 39). Parallel influence is very likely in two such traditionally associated passages. Cf. the parallel influence in the Samaritan Pentateuch (A. Geiger, Nachgelassene Schriften [Berlin, 1876], II, 60f.) and in the Hebrew Vorlage of the Is-LXX (J. Ziegler.
12
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
also the second personal pronoun O'ou. "EIl1t'poO'(h:v is a purely stylistic change to avoid a second 1t'pO 1t'poO'C::l1t'ou. The quotation is Septuagintal in form, except for one contact with the Hebrew text and one sty1istic change. Mt 15: 4a (= 19: 19): "£I-'-CC TOV nccTEpcc )(ccl T~V (L'I)TEpCC Mk 7: 10: "£I-'-cc TOV nccTEpcc O'ou )(ccl T~II (L'I)TEPCC O'ou (Mk 10: 19 = 7: 10, except for omission of the second O'ou, retained by N·CW0al.)
Lk 18: 20: T£(LCC TOil nCCTEpcc O'OU )(ccl T~II (L'I)TEpCC I-'-'I)TEpCC] + O'OU Nal~ abc syr Ex 20: 12; Dt 5: 16 LXX = Mk 7: 10. MT: 1~N
nN' 1~!lN nN '!I!:)
The differences between the NT texts in the possessive pronouns may be due to the catechetical use of this commandment.1 But the LXX often did not render the possessive pronoun,2 so that Mt may merely have omitted them. Even the Hebrew text may sometimes have left suffixes to be implied. s Or Mt's omission may be stylistic, the definite articles half fulfilling the function of the possessives. 4 Influence from the emphatic state of nouns in Galilean Aramaic is also possible. Ii Whatever the reasons-and various influences may have combined-Mt has departed from Mk, the LXX, and the MT. Mt 15: 4b; Mk 7: 10 6 )(CC)(OAOYWII
Ex 21: 17 LXX 6 )(CC)(OAOYWII
MT "v~'
nccTEpcc
nccTEpcc cclhou
'~!lN
i) (L'I)TtPCC
i) (L'I)TEPCC cclhou
'~N'
6ccvch<jl TeA&UTcX.Tw
"eAeu..qO'el 6CCllcX.T<jl
n~'~ m~
Ex 21: 17 LXX nccTEpcc CCUTOU] om CCUTOU Luc (75) I (L'I)TEpCC CCUTOU] om cclhou bw (symbols of BrOOke-McLean) I TEAeuT~O'el 6CCllcX.T<jl] 6CCllcX.T<jl TEAeuTcX.Tw AFLuc (75) (= NT)
Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Is [Munster, 1934], 134f£'). An initial il in 1"il could easily drop out by haplography after OlDt 1 So Stendahl, 54f. 2 J. Ziegler (ed.), Is (Gottingen, 1939), 86. 8 See 1. L. Seeligman, The Septuagint Version of Is (Leiden, 1948), 65. R. D. Wilson is said to have suggested the same. One might even conjecture that in rs7~' !:)~N the !:) was confused with the' {as often happened when the top of the , was unduly shortened or indistinct [J. Kennedy, An Aid to the Textual Amendment of the OT (Edinburgh, 1928), 82f.]) and omitted by haplography (note that Lk 18: 20 drops the possessive after I-'-'I)"epcc, but not after nCCTEpcc), the first possessive subsequently being dropped through parallelism. 4 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek NT in the Light of Historical Research 8 (New York, 1919), 684. & McNeile, Mt, 222; C. Schneider, TWNT, III, 469, n. I, following Zahn, Mt l (Leipzig, 1905), ad loco
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
The MT in Ex 21: IS, 16, 17 contains the expression n~~~ n;~, which LXXB renders by 6oc.vch·cp 6oc.voc.'toua6w (v. IS), 'tE:AE:U"t'~aE:L 6oc.vcx--cp (v. 17), and 6oc.veX"t'cp "t'E:AE:U"t'eX't'W (v. 16). A, F, and Lucian have 6oc.veX't'cp 6oc.voc."t'oua6w in verses IS, 16, but 6oc.veX"t'cp "t'E:AE:U"t'eX"t'W in verse 17. The interchange of verses 16 and 17 in the LXX may account for some of the confusion in the Greek MSS. The construing of 6eXvoc.'toc;; with "t'e:AE:U"t'aV is unusual, though occurring also in Ex 19: 12. The usual rendering in the LXX is 6oc.veX"t'cp 6oc.voc."t'oua6w. Either the LXX has taken the infinitive absolute n;~ as a noun (nJ~) or freely renders in order to preserve the assonance of the Hebrew. Since LXXB has 6cx.veX."t'cp "t'E:AE:U't'eX"t'W in verse 16, the same reading in LXXAFLuC(75) may not be the result of assimilation to the NT.1 Even were assimilation to the NT to be suspected, the presence of the same reading in the adjoining verse in LXXB makes the NT reading essentially Septuagintal. '0 Xoc.XOAOYWV shows dependence on the LXX, because the usual rendering for ?'l'p is xoc.'t'oc.piia6oc.L. The rendering ~ for' is legitimate,2 but bears the Septuagintal stamp. The omission of the possessive pronouns does not necessarily show departure from the LXX (as it does by Mt alone in the first half of the verse)-and, in fact, may serve to show greater dependence on the Greek OT, since the first oc.u't'ou is omitted by Lucian (75) and the second by b w (Lagarde's Lucianic text 3). In assimilation to the NT, both possessives would probably have dropped out, so that there is good evidence for a pre-Christian LXX text in which the possessives were absent, later inserted to conform with the Hebrew text.' We may safely assume this quotation is purely Septuagin tal. . 1 Stendahl, loco cit. I acknowledge indebtedness to Stendahl's admirable discussion of this quotation. 8 See BDB, S.V. " I, d. 8 P. de Lagarde, Librorum Veteris Testamenti Canonicorum pars prior Graece (Gottingen, 1883). A. Rahlfs showed that these manuscripts did not contain a pure Lucianic text (Mitteilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu G6ttingen [Berlin, 1928], Bd. 4, Heft I, 76f.), but the possibility remains that the reading was Lucianic, Ur-Lucianic, and pre-Christian. , On pre-hexaplaric and pre-Christian assimilation of the LXX to the Hebrew, see W. Staerk, ZWT, 36 (1893), 95f.; H. A. Sanders and C. Schmidt, The Minor Prophets in the Freer Collection and the Berlin Fragment of Genesis (New York, 1927), 25-29; J. Ziegler (ed.). Duodecim Prophetae (Gottingen, 1943), 33f.; idem, ZAW, 61 (1945/48), 93f.; P. Kahle, TLZ, 79 (1954),88; P. W. Skehan, in VT Supplement IV (Leiden, 1957), 156-158.
14
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
Mt 15: 8, 9
Is 29: 13 LXXNAQ MT ILOL lOll /) Aa.Oe; OUTO!; Mm C17M TOre; xeLAea1v TOre; xeLAealv a.?)T(7lV "nDIV~' "D~ ILe: TLIL~ TLILwaLv ILe 'l'i~~ ~ 8& xa.p8La. a.lhwv ~ 8£ xa.p8La. a.UTWV ,~" 1t6ppoo ci7tExeL ci1t' ~Ilou' 1t6ppoo ci1tExeL ci1t' ~Ilou' 'l~~ pM' Il&~v 8£ aE~oVTa.L Ile IL&~V 8£ ae~ovTa.L Ile: 'nN CnN" 'MT-I1 8L8&axoVTee; 8L8a.axa.Ata.c; 8L8&axOVTee; ~VT&AILa.Ta. Mi~'~ C'lVlN n'~;; ~VT&AILa.Ta. civ6pw1toov av6pw1toov xa.1 818a.axa.ALa.c; Mt 15: 8, 9 a1tExeL] ~aTLv D lat similiter syr Clpt Is 29: 13 LXX OUTOe;] + (.~.) ~v (om Luc) Tiil aT6ILa.TI a.UTOU xa.1 ~v BLuc MT POi] PO, Tug it (= "be far away"); IQIs& (= OT Pesh 'tlJ;I)] ~l'rnl LXX it (IL&~v) CnN,']nN" IQIs& n'~~] n'~~~ IQIsa Tug Mi~'~] C'i~'~ Targ LXX Mk 7: 6, 7 = Mt, except Mk has OUTOC; /) Aa.6c;] /) Aa.Oe; OUTOe; BDl071bcfilq r 2 vg syrSin,pesh Geo Bas 'rIIL~] aya.1t~ DWitCITert a1texeL] i!Xe:L W; ci!pea~xev D; a1tea~ 6.; OC1teaTLV 0 565pc Pap. Egerton 2: /) Aa.Oe; OU'roe; TOre; xeLAeaLV a.U'rWv 'rLllwaLv Ile ILa.T~V ILe ae~OVTa.L ~VT&AIla.Ta. [ocv6pW1toov IM&aKOVTeC;] 1 iyyL~el
P'"'
P'"')
The longer text of LXXB is hexaplaric. 2 The LXX reads
~Mh~
(!J.cX:t''Yjv) for'l:IJ;I) (MT) (cf. Is 41 :29).3 In view of the variant readings
in this clause in 1QIsa. and the Targum, we may assume corruption of the Hebrew text and that the LXX has not rendered freely, but has reproduced a text which read 'nN 'N" 'Mn,. 1QIsa has dropped the suffix from cnN". In the resultant 'nN nN'" the ending nNin nN" may have been dropped by haplography (leaving N") or added (to N") by dittography. Whichever direction such a development may have taken, N" stands very close to the LXX-Vorlage, (the missing suffix of which is itself scribally close to the following '[nN]). The LXX reads n'~~ as a plural, against the MT. The awkward Hebrew construction Mi~'~ C'lVlN m~~ (= "a commandment of men taught" with "them" understood, or "learned" with "by rote" understood 4) the LXX renders somewhat peri-
'N"
See C. H. Dodd, BJRL, 20 (1936), 80f. F. Field, Origenis Hexaplorum (Oxford, 1875), ad loc.; E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford, 1889), 177f.; W. Staerk, ZWT, 40 (1897), 246; R. R. Ottley, The Book of Is according to the Septuagint (London, 1904-06), II, 249; Stendahl, 57. 3 See esp. E. Nestle, ET, II (1899/1900), 330. , It is said that in the Hebrew text God charges the people with fearing him only in obedience to human commandment; whereas in the LXX and 1
2
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
15
phrastically with a second form of 8L8oc.crx,-, for which the Hebrew has no equivalent.l,s Like the Targum, the LXX (8L8cX.crX,O\l"t"e:t; (= assimilation to Mk) Dt 6: 4, 5 LXX: &KOI)e:, 'Iap«1)A, XUPIOt; 0 6e:0t; l)(.L&v KUPIOt; e:tt; EaTlv; K«\ ciy«n:ljae:lt; XUPIOV TOV 6e:6v aOI) l:l; /SA'ljt; T'ijt; K«p8£«t; aOI) K«\ l:l; /SA'ljt; T'ijt; q,1))('ijt; 0'01) K«\ l:l; /SA~t; T'ijt; 3I)vd~e:oot; aOI) MT: ,:;):1, 1:1:1" ":;):1 1~i1"N mi1~ nN n:lilN' :,nN mil~ '3~i1"N mil~ "N'ID~ »~ID
: "N~ ":;):1, 11D!:l3
Cf. II Kings 23: 25.
The following table sets forth the textual situation concerning the three (or four) "tones": Dt
K«p3£« 8ldvol«
q,l)x1) q,l)x1)
K«p3£« II K K«p8£« x«p8£« Mt x«p3£« x«p8£«
q,1))(1) q,l)xlj taxut; q,l)x1) to'XUt;
x«p8£«
q,l)x1)
x«p8£«
q,l)xlj
x«p3£« x«p8£« x«p8£« x«p8£0( KlXp8£«
q,l)x1) q,l)x1) 8ldvol<X
Mk 12 : 30 12 : 33
XlXp8£<x x«p8(<x Lk
xlXp8£1X xlXp3(1X
auve:al~ auve:O'I~
8OvlX(.Llt; 8uv<X(.LIt; taxut; taxUt; taxu~
I\Il)x1) 81dvoIIX 81dvoIIX
AFM BrPap. 963 &),),Ot; (Hexapla) 8Ov<X(.LIt; Luc (75) A B 33 (,Iaxut;, a doublet for 8ldvOIIX, has displaced tVl)xlj.) C syrSin, cur (,Iaxut; displaces the un-Semitic and difficult 3IdvollX.) 8ldvol« 0 fI3 alsyr peSh (= assimilation to Mk, the gloss taxut; Inserted wrongly) taxut; taxut; Dpcit taxut; A to'xut; A fI3 700 al t; (The unique O'uve:alt; has been provided with a doublet, tVl)xlj.) o 565 it (The unique O'uve:alt; has been suppressed by a synonym for ta)(ut;, the LXX's 8OvlX(.LIt;. ) taxut; D (The two preceding phenomena concerning auvsalt; are combined.) 81dvoIIX DI241 pc it Mcion
1 On the Hebrew concept of man as a psychical whole, see H. W. Robinson, in The People and the Book (Oxford, 1925), 353ff.; J. Pedersen, Israel (Oxford, 1926-40), I-II, 99ff.; C. Guignebert, The Jewish World in the Time of Jesus
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
23
The Marcan h against the Hebrew !1 displays dependence on the LXX, as also in the first part of the shema', missing in Mt and Lk. Mk's taxoc; does not show divergence from the LXX, for the occurrence of this word in Dt Luc {iAAOC; and in II Kings and the total disappearance of MVOCfLLC; in the NTl demonstrate that taxoc; had been accepted into the Greek form of the shema'. Contrastingly, Mt's ~v and his reversion to the three tones show his independence from Mk, who has four tones, and from the LXX, which has MVOCfLLC; or Laxoc;, but never 8LOCVOLOC.in the third tone. Had Mt wanted to retain the three tones and yet maintain dependence on Mk, he would have needed only to adopt or revise the second Marcan form (v. 33). Matthaean independence from Mk is further seen in his omission of (iXOUE, ••• xoc£, surely remarkable in view of Mt's Jewish bent and his tendency to expand quotation material. Concerning 8LOCVOLOC, Laxoc;, and the third tone, numerous possibilities exist: a) Mt has dropped Mk's taxoc;, not thinking that he now has no equivalent for 'N~.2 But since we know Mt had in mind the Hebrew text (~v-!1), which was no doubt second nature to him, this seems improbable. Nor is Mk's 8LOCVOLOC beyond suspicion: it could be a doublet for xocp8£oc or IjJ\)X~, or assimilation to Mt-note its omission in D pc it and its different placement in A and the majority of Lucan MSS, both of which are often tell-tale signs of a gloss inserted into the text. b, c) Mt's 8LOCVOLOC represents a doublet alongside xocp8toc or ljJux~ for !1!1? or WEll, the equivalent for 'N~ having been suppressed for (London, 1939), II7f.; G. E. Whitlock, Interpretation, 14 (1960), 9ff. E. E. Ellis objects that the above interpretation rests on an unbiblical body/soul dualism and really implies that bodily resurrection is unnecessary ("If Abraham is now personally 'living', no resurrection would be necessary for God to be 'his God' ") (NTS, 10 [1964], 274f.). The first objection fails to recognize that there is a subdued Biblical dualism of spirit and body, and the second strangely fails to recognize the body-soul unity. Jesus' statement, "He is not the God of the dead, but of the living," supports the traditional view that there is a present spiritual existence which necessitates the raising of the body to be reunited with the spirit for a whole existence, eternal half-existence in spirit form being ruled out because God created man a body-soul unity. 1 Except in D e 565 it of Mk I2: 33, perhaps because of assimilation to the LXX. I Swete, op. cit., 268; Allen, Mt, 241; B. F. C. Atkinson, Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, 79 (1947),49; Stendahl, 75; J. Jeremias, ZNW, 50 (1959), 271.
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
the sake of the three tones. Again, Mt's dependence on the Hebrew presents a stumbling-block to this view. d) Mt's 8L&'VOL(X is meant to convey the intensifying force of 'Nbnote that 8L&'VOL(X stands last in Lk-to"Xuc; (and MV(X!LLC;) rejected as having an improper connotation of physical might or material wealth. AL&'VOL(X would then mean "mental might." 1 The rendering of 'Nb by 8L&'VOL(X would be unique. e) 'IO"xuc;, a doublet with 8L&'VQL(X for 'Nb, was a marginal gloss which made its way into the texts of Mk and Lk. All three synoptists originally had x(Xp8((X-IjJI.)X~-8L&.VOL(x. 2 f) Mk's 8L&'VOL(X may be rejected. See above a). g) Mk's 8L&'VOL(X is a doublet with X(Xp8L(x for ::1::1';1.3 AL&'VOL(X usually stands for ::1::1, in the LXX. But why is it inserted after IjJI.)X~? h) Mk's 8L&'VOL(X is a doublet alongside IjJI.)X~ for WEll. Then, with O"UVEO"LC;, Mk gives three alternative renderings for WEll! Also, 8L&'VOL(X never renders WEll in the LXX. i-k) The same possibilities as in Mk, f)-h), exist for Lk's 8L&'VOL(X.' The striking combination of EX and EV in Lk reveals knowledge of more than one text-tradition. 6 The confusion, arising out of the fact none of the synoptists or copyists used the Greek shema' in their youth,6 defies disentangling. Three general conclusions are certain: Mk stands close to the LXX; Mt goes directly to the Hebrew text; Lk conflates his sources. Mt 22: 39 (= 19: 19b); Mk 12: 31 (cf. v. 33); Lev 19: 18 LXX: liyom~ae:lTOV a.7tOXCX6LO'T&Ve:L 7t&VTCX Mal 3: 23, 24 LXX: xcxt tSou ~yw a:7tOO'Tt),),W ulJ.Tv 'H),(cxv ••• 81; xcxpS(cxv 7tCXTPOI; XT),.
MT: .... m~K ~? ~~IDi'n
...
M~?K
a.7tOXCXTCXO'T·~O'e:L
nK c:;,? n?ID ~:;'lK itlM
Mk's choice of OC1tOXot6LG't'cX."e:L for ~~IDM shows dependence on the LXX, but the form itself deviates from the LXX. Mt's OC1toxot't'otG't'~Ge:L conforms to the LXX exactly, but may be motivated more by a desire to make clear the futurity of Elijah's ministry of restoration. Mt 19: 7
Mk 10: 4
Dt 24:
80UVCXL
~L~),(OV
~L~),(OV
a:7tOO'TCXO'(OU ypciljlcxL
ypciljle:L CXOT1i ~L~),(O" a.7tOO'TCXO'(OU xcxt SWO'e:L e:tl; Tal; Xe:Tpcxl; CXOTIjI; xcxt ~~CX7tOO'Te:),e:L CXO-r7)V
cbtOO'TCXO'Lou
xcxt a:7tO),UO'CXL CXOT~V CXO~V BCpm 1;] om KD8al
xcxt a.7tO),UO'CXL
1
LXX
EX Tijl; otX(CXI; CXOTOU
MT M?~n:;,
'DO
nn',:;,
1m,
n"~
nn?ID' 'n'~~
1 "Why Lk should not have written 0 iX),e:XT61; is puzzling. Is he unconscious of the allusion to Is 42? Or is an emphasis on the thought of the perfect participle intended? B So Creed, op. cit., 135.
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
By placing 80UVOCL before ~L~Alov OC7tOO''t"OCO'LOU, Mt has smoothed out the emphatic order of Mk and conformed to the order in the OT text. On the other hand, whereas Mk drew on the verb "write," with which ~L~ALOV oc7toO"t"ocO'lou is construed in Dt, Mt has reached into the next clause in Dt for the verb "give." In both gospels the more technical OC7tOAUO'OCL replaces E~OC7tOO''t"e:Ae:L of the LXX. Although the reading oco't"~v in Mt may be suspected of assimilation to the OT text or may be a purely stylistic improvement, the lack of important evidence for oco,,~v as a variant reading in Mk 1 makes it more probable that the omission is due to harmonization with Mk. (Note the presence of the harmonistically corrupted Cod. D among supporters of the omission.) Otherwise, we should have expected the same stylistic improvement or assimilation to the OT in many more Marean MSS of importance. If then ocu"'~v be accepted as genuine, Mt has carried the quotation one word further than Mk. Mt 19: 26 Mk 10: 27 '!tcxpa. '!tcXv't'cx Be 'Ya.p f)e:ii> Buvcx't'el '!tcXv't'cx T>CXpa. Buvcx't'cX 't'ii> f)e:ii>
Gen 18: 14 LXX
MT
[L'~ &Buvcx't'e:L
N7!:l'i1
Lk 18: 27 't'a. (&80vcx't'cx '!tcxpa. &vf)p OOT>O~c;) Buvcx't'el T>cxpa 't'ii> f)e:ii>
T>cxpa 't'ii> f)e:ii>
~O''t'w
P~[LCX;
i11i1'~
,:1,
'!tcxpa] om Luc (75) 't'ii> om BSPe ncXv't'cx... f)e:ii>] (eO''t'~v) 't'ql fle:ii>] KUPL(:l91 Ibw '!tcxpa. Be 't'ii> f)e:iiv Luc (75)C Buvcx't'6v DitCl Some MSS in Mt and Mk add eO''t'~v as a stylistic improvement. Lk I: 37: OUK &BUVCX't'~O'E~ T>CXpel 't'ou f)e;ou T>!XV P~[LCX 't'ou f)e:ou BN· Dpe] 't'ii> f)e:ii> CSpl c;; Cf. Job 42:2; Zech 8:6.
n. Buv. trsp Npe
At first glance the Western reading in Mk looks attractive because of its distinctiveness and brevity. 2 However, the unusualness of 7tOCp<X with the dative in the sense required here 3 demands a clearer allusion to the LXX of Gen 18: 14 than the Western text would give. The Lucan word order and use of the definite article with 6e:ij> point to dependence on Mk 4 rather than on a Q or UrOnly Nand syrSin have cxu~v in Mk. J. Wellhausen favors this reading (Mk [Berlin, 1903], 87). 3 See A. Fridrichsen, Symbolae Osloenses, 14 (1935), 44-46. , The omission of 't'ii> by BSPe in Mk must be considered a stylistic change
1
2
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
39
Matthaean form. Yet Lucan dependence on Mk precludes the originality of the Western text in Mk, from which the Lucan word order and plural 8uvlX't'&. could not derive. The similarity of the Western text to Mt suggests harmonistic (Tatianic?) influence. Mk, then, as well as Mt and Lk, contains a clear verbal reminiscence of Gen 18:14. nlXp&. with the dative in the sense "for" or "with" is unique, so that dependence on the LXX is slavish at this point.! But in opposition to the LXX, Mt and Mk use the neuter form 7tOCV't'1X in place of the awkward p~[.L1X to render the indefinite ':1,.2 This underas a thing or matter rather than as a spoken word standing of agrees with the OT Pesh (Nm:l~) and may draw on a common exegetical tradition. By blending the two statements regarding the impossible and the possible Lk sacrifices 7tcX.V't'1X and close verbal resemblance to Gen 18: 14. To compensate for the loss of emphasis on 7tIXPdc. 6e:cp by his dropping the Marcan ft.A".' au 7tCXpdc. 6Ecp Mt places the phrase in the emphatic first position. Mt also omits the definite article with 6ECP in opposition to Mk and the LXX.
,:1,
Mt 20: 28; Mk 10: 45 xod 8ouvo" 't'7)V IjIUX7)II oc.hou AO't'POII all't'L 1tOAAWII
Is 53: 10 MT !:I~llm
!:IN
'IDDl !:lION
(vv. IIf.)
!:I~:I"
LXX 8w't'e: III ~ ljIux'~ 6f!.wII (illjle:'t'oct O"1tepf!.oc f!.ocxp6~toll) II 1te:pl afLocp't'Loc.; 1tOAAWV (v. 12) 13
~iXv
The thrice-repeated "his soul" in Is 53: 10-12 and the peculiar designation 7taAAwv-!:I~.:!' demonstrate that Mt and Mk do indeed allude to Is 53: 10.' The NT 80UVIXL for !:I~ID shows reminiscence of or assimilation to Mt. The presence of the article in Lk justifies its inclusion in the Marcan text. 1 Fridrichsen thinks the LXX, although it does not substitute "heaven" for the divine name, goes a step in that direction by using 1tOCprt. 't'ii> 6e:ii> for the divine sphere (= ill OUPOCllii» as opposed to the earthly, human sphere (lac. cit.; d. Field, Notes, 46f.). Contrast the Hebraistic 1tocpiX 't'ou 6e:ou in Lk I: 37, where otherwise the correspondence with the LXX (esp. Luc-1tiill p'ijp.oc) is close. Cf. P. Winter, NTS, I (1954/55), lI5; D. Tabachovitz, Die Septuaginta u. das NT (Lund, 1956), 88f. H Cf. Torrey, op. cit., 73. On the uses and renderings of.,:I', see G. Bertram, Theologische Rundschau, 10 (1938), 153. 3 Roman numerals indicate the order in the OT text. 4 See H. W. Wolff, Jesaja 53 im Urchristentum 3 (Berlin, 1952), 62, and R. H. Fuller, The Mission and Achievement of Jesus (London, 1954), 56£., who notes in Mk 8: 31; 9: 12 further allusions to Is 53, based on non-Septua-
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
the LXX; but the NT saying is based on an entirely different understanding of the OT passage, as is evident from the LXX's EeXV with the subjunctive and the second person plural of the verb and of the possessive pronoun. Au-rpov mayor may not be considered a loose rendering of CIUN.l Even if not, the non-Septuagintal character of this allusive quotation is beyond doubt. Mt 21: 9, etc.
The only constant is e:uAoY'Y)fLEVO~ ... XUPLOU, in which NT = LXX = MT.2 Mt omits all reference to a "king" or "kingdom"-very noteworthily in view of the kingdom-motif throughout the first gospel-and refers rather to -rij) utij).1.:ut8. Mk repeats e:U)\oi1jfLEVO~ and refers to ~ &PX.0fLEV'1} ~CXO'LAe:LCX -rou 7tcx-rpo~ '~fLwV .1.cxut8. Lk, as might be expected, stands farthest from the circle of Jewish thought in rejecting wO'cxwcX and any reference to David (Mt, Mk) or Israel (In). Instead, he inserts 0 ~CXO'LAe:U~ after 0 &px.6fLe:vo~ as an explanatory gloss (omitted, however, in Lk 13:35). Jn adds to the blessing a reference to 0 ~CXO'LAe:O~ -rou 'IO'pcx~A, which stands between Lk's complete rejection of Jewish terminology and the typically Jewish terminology of Mt and Mk. Mt and Mk agree in a final wO'cxwa &V -rOL~ U~LO'-rot~. But Lk, having rejected wO'cxwcX as unintelligible to a Gentile reader, falls back on the words of the angelic song in the Nativity, 86~cx EV u~tO'-rOL~ 6e:3exLC;. • . (J.E:'t"
No reason exists, then, to deny that the change from a cry for help to a cry of praise took place before the Christian era. 6 Lk's assimilation to the Song of the Nativity favors the view that ~\I 't'OLC; U~(cr't'OLC; has reference to the praise of heavenly beings. The idea that angels echo the praise of human beings is not unfamiliar in Judaism. 6 E:ucppocrU\I'YjC;. 4
Mt 21: 33
Mk 12: 1
Lk 20: 9
Is 5: 2 LXX
E(.Lljlu-re:ua&') &(.L 7tEAWVa K. cppay(.Lov aUTii> 7tEpLe6'1jxe;v x. wpu;e:v tV a{mj'l A1)VOV x. <j>Koo6WlJae;v 7tUPYOV?
&(.L7tEAwva •.. l:cpu-re:uaEv K. 7tEpLe61)Ke:v Ijlpay(.Lov x. wpu;e:\I
Ecpu-re:uaEv &(.L7tEAWVa
K. l:cpu-re:uaa &(.L7tEAOV ... K. cppay(.Lov 7te:pLe61)Ka •.• K. 7tpoAijvLov wpu~a EV O:UTii> K. <j>Koo6fL'YJa<x 7tUPYOV ...
U7tOA'~VLOV
K. <j>Ko06(.L1)ae:v 7tUPYOV
MT II I IV III
m:u~"
P'lV ,i1"i'0"
:li" tm
,:1
:I~n
1:1"
"'l~
1 On the impressive ceremony in which Ps 118 and Hosanna figured, see A. Edersheim, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services (London, n.d.). 191-193; J. Jeremias, ArrEAO~, 2 (1926), IOO-IDS; idem, ZNW, 50 (1959). 273· 2 Lev., R. 27.2; Sukka 4,5. 3 Strack-Billerbeck, [(ommenta·y zum NT (Miinchen, 1922-28), I, 845ff.; H. Bornhauser (ed.), Sukka (Berlin, 1935), 106. See further E. Lohse, NovTest, 6 (1963), 114-116. 4 Cf. Kennard, loco cit. 6 E. \Verner's argument that Mt's dative requires in the Hebrew a vocative for the person addressed and an accusative for the person to be helped completely misses that the dative implies a new meaning for Hosanna (op. cit., IDO). a See the Targum to Ps 148: If.; and Bab. Chullin 91b, quoted by Werner, ibid., I I of. ? According to Pallis, 7tUpyov denotes a country villa with an upper story, underneath which is a winepress (op. cit., 41). If so, Mt andMk may transpose the clauses in order to put the digging of the press before the building of the superstructure.
44
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
Since Jesus speaks this parable upon entering the Temple, it is probable he had in mind the Targumic interpretation of the tower as the Temple. Lk shows little concern with the OT parallel. The difference between &!L1te:)..WVct ("vineyard") in the NT and &!L1te:)..ov ("vine") in the LXX is not significant, for in Is the "vine" is planted in the "vineyard." 1 The NT compresses the parable, so that the owner plants the vineyard. The clauses have been chosen from the OT passage without regard to order. 2 NT, LXX, OT Peshitta, and Vulgate agree in understanding ,rJ?j:'o' (piel: "to gather out stones") as meaning "to build a (stone) fence" around the vineyard. This does not anticipate the rJ~wn~ of verse 5, for that word means "a hedge of thorns." Rather, it is supposed that the stones gathered from the field the farmer would use for a fence. 3 Mt
).:Y)v6v 4
(winepress)
MIt U7tOA1)VLoV 6 (vat below the winepress-so Aq, Sym)
LXX
MT
7tPOA1)VLOV
:::Ii"
(ambiguous)
(vat; secondarily, the winepress)
IIpo)..~vLOV
(only here in the LXX) would have been suitable. . The differences in word order have to do with emphatic style. Thus, in its text-form this quotation is primarily SeptuagintaL But the occasion of its use makes probable a contact with the Targum.
1 Seeligman rejects &!J.7tEAOV in the LXX as secondary, because no fewer than seven times in these verses the entire textual tradition uses a8e:Atplj> 'l"1j> a8e:Atplj> OtU'I"OU OtU'I"OU ~TCLYOtIL~Pe:OO"e:L
6 a8e:AtpOe;
1i
n
tvOt M~1l A~IL<jIe:'t'OtL 6 a8e:Alpoc; OtU'I"i)v EOtU't'1j> OtU'I"OU 't'~v yuvOtLKOt yuVOtLKOt KOtl ~~OtIlOtO''I"~O"1)
O"TC&pILOt 'l"1j> a8e:Atplj> OtU'I"OU
MT
Gen38:8LXX MT
':IID~ ~::> "n~ l:I~nx
1:I11~
... "
11~' ,nx
l~x 1:l'
...
l"I~:l~
l1np',
yOtIL~pe:OO"OtL
...
1:I:l~'
l"IlDX'" Otu't'i)v x.av&O''I"7)O'ov O'TC&PILOt 'l"1j> a8e:Atplj> O'ou yOtIL~p.
A]
emyOtIL~p,
Luc (75)
The use of 't'EXVOV by the synoptists avoids the inexact O'7tEp(Loc. of the LXX and correctly renders the Hebrew 1:l. 1 Mk's collective singular is closer to the MT than Mt's somewhat freer plural. All three synoptists differ from one another and from the LXX in the rendering of" l~x (1:l), &.cp7j (Mk) being foreign to the OT text,2 but (L~ ~'X.wv (Mt) and &.'t'EXVOC; ~ (Lk) being very idiomatic translations. By introducing Emyoc.(L~pEUO'EL, Mt crosses over to Gen 38: 8 one step before Mk and Lk. Note Mt's agreement with Lucian in the compound form of the verb. On the other hand, Mt rejects the compound form E~oc.Voc.O''t'~O'7l in Mk and Lk for the simplex form of the LXX (though Mt may be motivated more by stylistic preference 3).
1 OT commentators differ on the force of 1:l in Dt 25: 5. S. R. Driver maintains the word means a male son (Dt [ICC; Edinburgh, 1895], 282). C. F. Keil has the better of the argument, however, for he points out that according to Num 27: 4ff. the perpetuation of the house and name could be ensured through a daughter. Thus, the LXX, Vg, Josephus (Ant. IV. viii. 23). NT, and rabbis correctly interpret 1:l to mean a child of either sex (Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the OT [Edinburgh, 1865], III, 422). Z The Hebrew construction is possessive, containing no thought of "leaving," though Mk's may be considered a loose translation. S Cf. J. H. Moulton, The Expositor, 7, 7th Series (1909), 4IIf.
1:1pm l1'T
,~nx'
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
Mt 24: 6a: lLeA,..ljaeu 3£ &'KoueLv n;oMlLouc; Kex! &'KoeXC; 7tOAElLwv· op&u !L"~ 6poe:ia6e Mk 13: 7: lI..otv 3t &'KOUa"IJU 7tOAElLOUC; Kott &'KOeXC; 7tOAElLWV, !L"~ 6poda(le:. LIt 2 I : 9: lI..otv 3t &'Koua"lj..e 7tOAE(J.OUC; Kott &'Kot..ota..ota(otc;, lL·~ 7t,,0·lj6ij..e 7t"o"lj6iju] cpo~"lj6ij..e Ddq Dan II: 44 Theod: Kott &'KOotL Kott a7tou3ott ..otpci~ouaLV ot6..6v LXX: Kott &'KOl) ..otpci~eL ot6.. 6v MT: 'l'1'm:J~ n'17/:)!D'
The whole context in Dan has to do with wars. The plural of in the sense of "rumors" is rare. 1 Lk rejects the word and consequently moves away from the OT phraseology. In this word, therefore, and in the compound form of the expression the Theodotionie text is reflected (but not the LXX). However, the synoptics reject the other member of the doublet-rendering in Theodotion, cr7tOUacx(, in favor of 7tOAEfLOUC;. The exhortation fL"~ 8podcr8e: stands in contrast with the troubling of the king of the north. Here the NT renders 'm:J independently from the LXX and Theodotion. 2 cXxo~
Mt 24: 6bj MIt 13: 7j Rev I: Ij 4: Ij 22: 6: eX [am Mt, Mk] 3d YeXp [am Mk, Rev] yevEa60tL Lk 2 I : 9: 3ei YeXp ..otU"l"ot ye:vEa6otL 7tp W..OV Dan 2: 28 Theod, LXX: eX 3ei ye:V&O"OotL (£7t' £ax:x..wv "l"WV ~(J.EPWV) MT: (K~/:)" n~""InK:l) K'l'1' ~"T l'1/:)
The idea of necessity (ad) is an advance on the simple future of the MT, so that there is close dependence on the Greek OT text. 3 MT
Mt 24: 7j Mk 13: 81 Is 19: 2 LXX LIt 21: 10 £YEp6~ae:"l"otL
Kott
YeXp
£7te:ye:p6·~aoVTotL .•. Kott 7tOAe:!L"~ae:L .•.
~6voc;
n;6ALC; £7tt 7t6ALV Kott vO(J.OC; ht VO(J.6V -OV..otL] -e:"totL N· 7t6ALC;] pr tr.e:YEp6~aE ..otL ABc (-OV ..otL)
~6voc;
£7tt Kott
~otaLAdot
E7tt ~otaLAdotv
...
II Chron 15: 6 LXX
MT
~n~o~o,
... ,/:)n'l'
Kott 7tOAe:!L"~ae:L
""I'17 ~6voc; "'17 :l 7tpOC; ~6voc; l'1~'/:)/:) l'1~'/:)/:):l
Kott 7tOALC; 7tpOC; 7t6ALV (II.. L 0 6e:0c; t~Ea"·'laEV
ot6..ouc; £V 7tcian 6A(~eL)
'nn~' "1
"1::1
,,'17, ,,'17:l O~l'1'K '~) O/:)/:)l'1
'~:J
(l'1""1~
'Eye:p8~cre:'t"cxt
19:2),
in the NT echoes ~7te:ye:p8~crov't"cxt of the LXX (Is a very free, even incorrect translation of ,~o (pilpel: "to
See J. C. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae B (Oxford, 1909), 61. The Lucan n;"o"lj6iju is probably due to a special liking for the word. Among NT writers only Lk uses it, here and in Lk 12: 4 (P'6 700) j 24: 37. S T. F. Glasson, ET, 69 (1957/58), 214. 1
B
47
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
cover with armour, to arm [for warfare],,).1 The synoptics' retention of the two €1tCS in the LXX compensates for their discarding the prefix €1t-. Parallel influence from II Chron IS: 6 enters with e6vo 00 eyev'1j8'1j0"0(v
apx1i~
xT£O"ewc;
'~v
aq>' 00
iln~;n
nl7 iI'~
N"IIJN iln'ill n"iI~
yeyev'ljTo(~
~8vo~
~U
~xT~O"ev
ew~
.ou vuv
008' 00
(.L"~
ew~
0 8eo~ TOU vuv
MT
xo(! 00
(.L~
yev'IjTex~
yeV'ljTo(~
00 yeyovev] oox eyeveTo ND0Ir
am D0alit
~,.
.a.6 OU y~yOVtV &11'0 TOU octiiivot; xot1 (ltT' otUTOV ou 7tpoane~a&Tot~ ~Wt; tTiiiv dt; ytVtcX, ytvtiiiv MT: "" ", 'llZl ,17 I'J0" K? "'"K' C"17i'll~ l'1'i'1l K' 'i'l~~ Mt's P.e:yOCA'Y) after 6A'i:IjiLt; shows contact with I Macc 9: 27 (cf. Rev 7: 14)· Mk's ~O'OV't'<XL y~p <XL ~p.ep<XL €Xe:'LV<XL 6A'LIjiLt; recalls the LXX, €xe:£v'Y) ~ ~p.ep<x 6A£Ijie:CUt;, against Theodotion and the MT, l while Mt comes closer to the Hebrew i'l'~ n17 i'ln'm with ~a't'<XL y~p 't'6't'e: 6A'LIjiLt; (P.e:yOCA'Y)), yet not in agreement with Theodotion. Qt<x ou yeyove:v (Mt, Mk) agrees with Theodotion(Dan 12: 1) against the LXX. In the circumlocutory cbt' eXpi~t; wdae:cut; '~v ~x't'Lae:v 0 6e;6t; in Mk, the use of X't'£~e:LV reveals an influx from the parallel passage Ex 9:182 in its Septuagintal form (against '0\ "to found"). Mt's shortened form, eX7t' eXPX~t; x6ap.ou, may be an idiomatic rendering of the Hebrew text in another parallel passage, Joel 2: 2 (C,,17l'1 l~), 3 or may show contact with the aT Peshitta of Dan 12: 1 (n~" l~ K~'17). "Ecut; 't'ou vuv (Mt, Mk) again recalls Ex 9:18, but this time is an exact rendering of the Hebrew text against the LXX. OU8' (Mk: x<xt) au p.~ yev'Y)'t'<XL (Mt, Mk) recalls the similar expressions in Ex 10: 14; II: 6; Joel 2: 2 in their Hebrew forms.
l)(l~pott;
Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22
Dt 13:1-3 LXX
l:ye:p61JaovTCIt~ IjItUa6XpLaTo~
l:cXv at d.vClta-rjj l:v a01 1I'pocplJT'lJt;
xot1
i)
IjItUa07tpOcp'ijTCIt~
l:vu7tv~CIt~6(ltvot; l:VU7tV~OV xClt1 aij> ao~
ycxp (Mk: at)
Xott a&laoua~v GlJ(ldot (ltyaACit (Mk: om) xClt1 T~potTot Mk IjItUa6Xp~aTo~ Xot!] om D 124 1573 d i k a&laouaw] 7t0~lJaoua~v Depc;a
MT
C'p' ,~
Old Pal Targ Targ Jon
1::1'P::l N'::Il
'K C," C,," ,"K lnl' n'K
But Mk's Semitic idiom may reflect a pointing n~t'. See McNeile, Mt, 349. The assertions concerning the severity of the Egyptian plagues are the pattern for Dan 12: I. See Beasley-Murray, op. cit., 78. 3 ('A7t') d.pxiit;standsforC"17(~)inJosh 24: 2; Prov8: 23; 1s63: I 6, 19LXX. 1 I
5I
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
Mt and Mk show independence from the LXX in Eye;p6~0'0v't'OCL. If the omission of ljie;uMxpLO''t'OL xoct in the Western text of Mk is to be preferred as a Western non-interpolation, Mt has inserted the words to correspond in chiastic order to the compound form of the OT text. 'Ye;u807tpotp9j't'OCL (Mt, Mk) agrees with Targum Jonathan and the newly discovered Old Palestinian Targum against the LXX and the MT. The decision between 8WO'OUO'LV (= Mt and Dt LXX MT) and 7tOL~O'OUO'LV in Mk is difficult. ~WO'OUO'LV may be assimilation to Mt, Mt having conformed Mk to Dt,1 or the Western text has replaced the Semitic "give" with "perform." 2 Me;ya)..oc, added by Mt, is a targumic embellishment. s Mt 24:29j Mk 13:24
Is 13:10 LXX
o -¥jAIOe;
aKoTla61jaETotl TOU ~AtOU &'VotT&AAOVTOe; KotL lj aEA1jvl} 00 8waEI TO cpwe; otOT'ije;
aKona6~aETotl
Kotl ~ aEA1jvl} 00 8waEI TO cpeyyoe; otOT'ije;
MT TD~TDJ'I
'nN:lt~
n,',
i1'l' N" "'N
MT
Is 34:4 LXX
Ked ot
Kotl 'lfcX.VTot Ta. &aTpot 'lfEae;iTotl
&'aTepEe; 'lfEaOUVTotl &.'lf0
[Mk:
~aOVTotl
,,~,
II
CN:1:lt ",:1'
Kotl t!aoVTotl al}(J.ELot tV ljAtct> Kotl aEA1jvlI Kotl liaTpOle; Kotl t'lft T'ije; y'ije; auvox~ t6vwv tv «'lfOp(q; iixoue; 6otMaal}e; Kotl acX.Aou
[cf. Is 17: 12]
tK]
TOU OOpotVOU 'lft'lfTOV"t'Ee;] Kotl ott 8UVcX.(J.ELe; TWV OOpotvwV [Mk: ott tv TOre; OOpotVOLe;, exc.
[Mk:
Lk 21:25,26
1TDn
+
I
'p~l'
N:1:lt
":::l
C'~TDi1
ott yap 8UVcX.(J.ELe; TWV OOpotvwV aotAEu61jaoVTotL
Dal it syr] aotAEu61jaoVTotl
KotL TotK~aOVTotL 'lfcX.aotl ott 8UV&'(J.ELe; TWV OOpotvwV
Cf. Joel 3:3, 4.
BLuc (in 0 sub .>;
&7tLe~'t'CXL
l(pcx't'~aCJ)aLV
l(pcx't"~aCXV't'E:e;
't'0 ltA7)a(ov
l(. cXltol('t'dvCJ)aLV
cXltol('t'E:tvCJ)aLv
cXltOl('t'E:~VCXL
l(. cXltOl('t'.]
tV 86A'I>]
cxu't'ov 86A'I> Ps 31 a\)VCXxe,
om B*pc
om Dair
,;':17, ,:17
'1';"
;'~'17:1
BNR 1219 55] e7tLa\)vcxxB. ALuc
The variant omissions in Mt and Mk appear to be slips of the pen, since the minor differences rule out insertion by parallel influence. In the allusion to Ps 3I: I4, where Mt alone assimilates the language to the OT, the prefixing of cruv- (~OUA.) by Mt is insignificant in view of the context and may be due to the parallelism with cruv~Xe'l)O'cxv. This latter word may have prompted the allusion, for it links Ps 3I: I4 with Ps 2: 2, a known early Christian proof-text (Acts 4:25 f.). Throughout both allusions the text-form is Septuagintal, Mt making a slight assimilation to the LXX by dropping Mk's &V (86)"cp) , which corresponds to the Hebrew :1. 1 Mt 26: II; Mk 14: 7: 7t(xv't'O't'E: yap 't'oue; It't'C&lXOUe; Dt 15: II LXX: ou yae !l-l} t)(A(lt71 &v8e-l}e; cXltO 't''ije; MT: l"'N;' :I'i'~ l":JN ':l l":JN] l":JN;' 1 MS Ken, Sam
"M'
N'
~XE:'t'E: y~e;
!lee'
~CX\)'t'oov
That there is an allusion to Dt I5: I I is evident, but it is so loose that comparison of text-form is possible only in the term" "poor." Here Mt departs from the rendering of the LXX, and his collective plural with the article may reflect the textual tradition represented in the Samaritan Pentateuch and I MS Ken. 1 I owe the notice of the allusion to Ex 21: 14 to Lohmeyer-Schmauch, Mt (Gottingen, 1956), 348.
57
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
Mt 26:28
Mk 14:24
Ex 24:8 LXX
Toi:iTo YcXP eaTIV TO ott(.LcX (.LOU T'ijC; 8to(61)l('I)C;
Toi:iTo EaTlv TO ott(.LcX (.LOU T'ijC; 8tot6ljx'I)C;
t80u
TO tXXUVVO(.LEVOV
TO m;pl 7tOAMiV
{mep 7tOAAWV
~XXUVVo(.LeVOV
TO ott(.Lot -riic; 8tot6ljx'I)C;
Is 53:12 LXX 7totpe866'1) dc; 6cXVotTOV ~ ~ux.~ ot,iTou . . . xotl ot\iToc; cX(.LotPT(otC; 7tOAAWV &vljVE:YXE:V
Jer 31 (38): 34 LXX dc; &cpealv cX(.LotPTIWV pa7. 46 NB T'ijC; 8Iot6.] TO T'ijC; epc] pr XotIV'~C; AD XottV'ijc; 8tot6. A fr
8Iot6'~)('I)C;
W fI fI3 565 700 pIlat syr sah bohpm c;; pr TO AC W fI fI 3 pI syrhk
The:WC; ~ao(.Lott Toti:C; &8Ix£otlC; ot,iTwv xotl TWV cX(.LotPTtWV otUTWV
MT illil
O"T l"l~':Il'
MT il'37il
l"l'~'
'WD1 N,m ... Ntm C~:J'
NW1
MT
"'ON 01'37'
Ol"lN~""
fr3 700 pIlat syr
c;; 7tOAAWV] + etc; &cpealV cX(.LotPTtWV W fr3 pc ag 2 sah(4) boh (= assimilation
to Mt) Lk 22: 20: TOUTO TO
7tOT·~PtOV ~ Xottv~ 8tot6'~X'1)
ev TeT) ott(.LotT£ (.LOU TO {mep U(.LWV
EX;(UVVO[Le:VO'l
I Cor 11:25 = Lk, exc. 8tot61}y.'I)] + EaTw; ott(.LotTt !Lou] pr ~[L
The points of contact between the OT and NT texts are the thoughts of spitting (Mt, Mk= LXX= MT) in the face (Mt, Mk [Western, Caesarean texts 2]= LXX= MT) and smiting (NIt, Mk= LXX [pot1tL~W] against the MT [c'~'~" "to the pluckers"], but possibly with rQIsa [c"~~" "to the smiters"?] 3). Mt's use of Etc; ('t'O 1tp0O"W1tov) instead of a dative after EVe1t't'uO"otv may reflect the dc; in Is 50:6 (although in a different connection). Lk, following as usual in the passion narrative an independent tradition,4 betrays no reminiscence of Is 50: 6.
1 Jewish Hermeneutics in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts (Assen, 1954). 152ff. 2 In syr Sin and sah codd TljlltpOaOO~OciVe:L represents the verb ::J~17, noting that ill several!passages ::J~l7 is rendered by b8uviiv (ET, 9 [1897/98],521). Although transliteration of ~ by ~ is possible, the required supposition that wvd8LO'a.~
iv E(LOt ... 6 u!o~ T. civ6p.
KotyW EV otUTij> ciPV~ p46 157 pr TtcX.v..e:~ B ot &V8pE~) om B o! EV ... ctu..ou) ot ex ..oU orxou v
+
Mt's &v6pw1tov is not so close to 1~ as ut6t; (LXX, Lk) and may be drawn from the last part of the verse (W'N; LXX-ocv8p6t;). Similarly, Mt renders ~ by Xot..&' with the genitive independently from the LXX and Lk (e1tt). Lk first writes the dative after e1t(, and then the accusative in order to conform with the LXX. The paratactic Xot('s are sprinkled freely in Mt; but the first evangelist must have been working from a Semitic text in which the conjunctions were present, for the OT Peshitta has waw's exactly where Mt has Xot('s. It is doubtful the Peshitta was influenced by the NT in such an insignificant detail and in so allusive a quotation. In the possessive pro1 See H. Riesenfeld, Coniectanea Neotestamentica, II (1947), 207-219; Schlatter, op. cit., 348, for the meaning "to disdain, refuse."
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
79
nouns after (.Ll)'t'p6~ and 1t&'J6&pii~ Mt stands closer to the OT text than Lk. In the last clause Mt carries the quotation farther than Lk and renders independently from the LXX (where the textual tradition is hopelessly divided) with a very fine idiomatic rendering of the Hebrew, o[ o£X~otxot otu't'O\) for ,n':1 'lVlK. For each prepositional phrase in Mt and Mic, Lk presents a doublet. Within the first member of each the nouns are in chiastic position. The emphasis intended can hardly be due to free-quotation. This is a detailed and conscious reworking of the OT text. G. Quispel has suggested that when rendered into Greek, Jesus' sayings which were cast in poetic parallelism may have been considerably abbreviated; i.e., only one of the two parallel kola may have been translated. l It would then seem that the expanded form of Lk is more primitive, that Mt has assimilated to the OT passage in its Semitic form(s), and that Lk conforms slightly to the LXX. MT Mt II :5; Lk 7:22 Is 35:5.6 LXX TUCPAOl a.Vtt(jA£7tOUaLV xttl )(WAol
m:p~7tttTOuaLV
Ae:7tpol xtt6ttp(~ov't'tt~ xttl xcucpol ocxououaLV
a.vo~)(6~aoVTtt~
bcp6ttA(J.ol TUCPAWV T6Te: &Ae:1:'t'tt~ 00Atp6v aou -rfi BLotVO(~ aou' eAe:Y(lijl EAEy~e:L; 'rbv n:Alja(ov aou MT: ,n~~17 nN n~~'n n~'l'1 ,~~?~ ,~nN nN NllUn N?
That this is an allusion to the OT is confirmed by the other quotations from Lev 19 in Mt 5: 33, 43, 48 and by the exactly similar theme, harmony among brethren, in the OT and NT passages. Either Mt's ~AEy~OV is assimilation to the LXX (a good rendering of n::l~) or Lk has missed or cared nothing for the allusion. ('E7tL't"LILcXV is frequent in the synoptics, but slightly more so in Lk.) Mt 21: 44: Kotl 6 n:e:awv l:n:l 'rbv AWOV 'roi)'rov auV6Aota6ijae:'rotL' etp' 8v B' ii.v n:&an, ALK(l1jaI>L otu'r6v D 33 it syr stn Ir Or omit the verse. Lk 20: 18: n:ii; 6 n:l>awv en:' EKl>ivov 'rbv AWOV auv6)..(Xa6ijae:'t'otL· etp' Ilv B' ii.v n:EO"7), ALK(lijae:L otu'r6v
In view of the omission in the Western text of Mt, in Origen's copious commentary on this passage, and in Irenaeus and Eusebius, who copy verses 33-43 and would hardly have failed to include so striking a concluding sentence, the verse in Mt may be an interpolation from Lk. Nevertheless, the possibility of genuineness remains. The minor differences between Mt and Lk are not easily accounted for on the hypothesis of interpolation. B. Weiss and S. G. F. Brandon ask why the verse was not placed after verse 42 to So J. R. Harris, ET, 37 (1925/26), 9; Tabachovitz, op. cit., II3f. So in classical Greek often. See R. Bultmann, TWNT, VI, 176. Cf. Mt 24:45; 25:21, 23; Lk 12:46; 16:10f.; Ro 3:3; I Cor 1:9; 10:13; I Thess 5:24; I Tim 3:II; II Tim 2:2; Heb 3:12; 10:23; III ]n 5. 1
Z
85
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
preserve the Lucan sequence. As it is, verse 43 disrupts the natural connection between verses 42 and 44, and this may be the very reason for omission in the Western text.! R. Swaeles argues that the general thought of Mt 21: 43 refers to the whole of Dan 2: 44 and leads into the allusive quotation in Mt 21: 44, which therefore must be original.2 The allusion is to Dan 2: 34, 35, 44, 45. Mt and Lk agree with Theodotion in A~}(fLiiv against the LXX (&q>OCV£~ELV ) and the MT (I'J'O-"to make an end of"). But cruv6Aiicreoc~ ("to break in pieces") shows direct recourse to the Aramaic (pp,-"to break in pieces"), as against AE1t't"ovm ("to make thin, beat out"-LXX, Theod) and XOC't"OCAELV ("to grind"-LXX). Mt 23:12
Lk 14:lIj 18:14
lia'n~
7tii~
8i:
utjl6Jae;L ~otUTbv Tot7te;Lvoo6ljae;...otL xotl /SaTL~ Tot7te:LV6Jae:L ~otUTI>V
utjloo6ljae:TotL
6 utjlwv totUTOV
Ezek 21: 31 LXX l:... ome;[vooaot~ TO Utjl'ljAOV
MT l'I'!:IlIJl'I 1"1:lln
Tot7te:Lvoo6~ae;TotL
xotl 6 [18: 14: 68i:] Tot7te:LVWV ~otu ... bv utjloo6~ae: ...otL
xotl ... 1>
utjlooaot~
Tot7te:LV6v ~
l'I:lll'l1 '~ElIIJ1"1
Although this maxim is often voiced in Prov, the NT expression is patterned after the saying in Ezek. 3 In the LXX the wicked prince of Israel has abased that which was high by taking off the mitre and exalted that which was low by putting on the crown. In the MT the mitre and the crown are both taken from the wicked prince and he himself is abased. Obviously, the NT adaptation to persons is based on the Hebrew text. The LXX renders the clauses in chiastic order, and with this the NT agrees. It may be that the LXX-translator wished an exact parallel: "taken off the mitre"-"abased the high," "put on the crown"-"exalted the low." However, the Hebrew Vorlage of the LXX and NT may have had the order of the LXX. The difference in the consonantal text would be very slight, requiring only the shifting of a final paragogic 1"1: l'I'EllIJl'I1"1:lll'l1 l'I:llJ, '!:111m. (There is not even a need to shift the yodh in the MT, if we assume a sere vocalization, '~!fitl.) '1\jJouv and 't'OC1tE~VOUV are natural renderings of the Hebrew words. Thus, there is no necessary point of contact between the NT and the LXX. 1 2
3
B. Weiss, Mt, 371 j Brandon, op. cit., 244. NTS, 6 (1959), 310-313. See Lohmeyer-Schmauch, op. cit., 341.
86
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
Lk 11:50,51 7tiiv cxtfLcx 3Lxcxtov l:xxuvv6fLevov l:7tt TIj~ y'ij~
1:0 cxtfLcx 7tliv1:ooV 1:Clv 7tpocpl)1:Clv 1:0 l:xxexufLtvov
Lam 4:13 LXX 1:Clv l:xXe6V1:ooV CX!fLCX 3txcxLov
MT
C'::>ElWi1 i1:1'P:1 C, C'P":S:
l:v fLeae:> cxuTIj~ II Chron 24:20-22 LXX MT
i!oo~
1:0U cxtfLCX1:0~ ZcxxcxpLou u!ou BcxpcxXLou
~oo~ cxtfLCX1:0~
ZcxxcxpLou ~7tOAOfLeVOU
TOV 'A~cxpLcxv i1":JT 1:0V 1:0U 'I003cx£ ... 37"'i1' 1:1 l:AtBo~6Al)acxv[v. 21] l:JN ,i1?Jl,' [l:BcxvcX1:ooaev, v. 22] £l'i1'] ,:s:n:1 ... l:v CXUAn otxou xupLou l'I1i1' l'I':J
8v l:cpoveuacxn fLe1:CX~O 1:0U vcxou xcxt 1:0U BuatcxaTIlpLou
1:0U
Bcxp.] Ioiadae Gospel of the Nazarenes
1:0U ~7tOAofL .... ofxou] u!OU Bcxpcx)(Lou 8v l:cp6veuacxv ~vcXfLeaov 1:.B.x.1:.vcxoU D(Pc)syrcur (= assimilation to Mt via Tatian?)
fLe1:CX~O 1:0U
Buatcxa1:l)pLou xcxl 1:0U otxou
One might think that there is no definite allusion here. But a comparison of Mt and Lk shows that Mt stands closer to the OT texts. The usual OT expression is 'Pl c, (LXX: ottfLot &.6 the Temple, but probably not between the porch and the altar, since he was not a priest. It is improbable that the NT tradition, usually assigned to Q, dates from after A.D. 67. Jesus' idea is that all the past guilt will come upon the generation he addresses. And why the invention of legends concerning the death of John's father if the reference was to the Zecharias in Josephus? The traditional view that Jesus refers to the first and last murders in the OT canon, about both of which it is stated a reckoning would be made, remains the best-despite the contention that the OT canon and the order of the Hagiographa were not fixed by Jesus' time. The present passage is itself evidence to the contrary. Because of the confusion, we cannot be sure about the origin of the reading Ba;pa;x(ou in Mt. On the whole question and for further references, esp. in rabbinical
88
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
to rabbinic tradition concerning the location within the Temple precincts of Zachariah's death. 1 Mt 23:38; Lk 13:35: t80u eXq>L&'rCCL UfLLV 6 otKoe; UfLiiiv Mt BLff2syrSln sah bohpl ann] + t!p1JfLOe; rell e; Lk P45VldNABW fI 69 565 pm it vgw syrSln sah boh P1] + ~P1JfLoe; n028al it vgs, cl syrsln boh (7) e; Jer 12: 7 LXX: ~YKIX'rIX).,e).omlX 'rov o!K6v fLOU, tXq>ijKIX 'r1)V K).,1JPOVOfLLIXV fLoU MT: 'n?Ml nN 'nlDOl 'n':l nN 'n:m7 22: 5 LXX: de; ~P~fLCIlO"LV i!a'rIXL 6 otKoe; oiS'roe; MT: :"1m n':l:"l :"1':"1' :"I:l,n?
Either Mt has rendered :IT:17 (Jer I2:7) independently from the LXX, or he has allowed occp1jXot in the next clause of the LXX to influence his wording. The change from first person (Jer) to second person (Mt, Lk) deepens the thought of desolation. It is possible that ~P"lJ!.I.o P88) npocpi)'t"IjC; oux eye:!pe:..ctL; and I: 46: 'Ex Nct~ctpe6 Mvct..ct! "I'L ciyct6bv e:!VctL; (although this latter question may be due to local rivalry between Cana and Nazareth rather than to an especially bad reputation of Nazareth)-also Mt 26:73, concerning Galilean pronunciation, ridiculed by Judaeans. Cf. also Black's view, above, p. 100, n. 2. 8 Note the thought of contempt in Is 14: 19: "But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch." 7 So also "eruditi Hebraei," according to Jerome on Is II: I. P. Winter would derive n.,:i&l from ':i&l, "to keep watch," on the basis of the town's position on a hill (NTS, 3 [1956/57], 138f.). 1
B
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
to the general tenor of the prophets, for elsewhere in the Matthaean fulfilment-quotations Isaianic passages are always identified as such (except in I :23, where the quotation is reported as that of the angel; 'Hacxtou is present in D pc it syrsin , Cur).1 In the remaining, "prophet" is always in the singular. 2 , 3 It has long been recognized that Is II: I received a Messianic interpretation in the Targum and rabbinical literature. In the latter, "Branch" -passages are interpreted as meaning the Messiah will come out of obscurity and a low estate.' The matter stands in even clearer light since the discovery of the Qumran scrolls, in which there is a strong '~l-motif. 6 Of great significance is The N e?er and the Submission in Suffering Hymn from the Dead Sea Scrolls edited by M. Wallenstein. 6 Here we find the combination of '~l with the thoughts of lowliness, despisedness, and suffering-with a clear allusion in line 6 to Is II: 1. The theme epitomized in line 30, "I thus became the [des]pised," is developed throughout the hymn. Thus, Mt builds his citation upon the '~l = lowliness motif as well as upon phonetic similarity. In Jesus' growing up in Nazareth there is both an outer correspondence to Is II: I and related passages in the place-name, based on '~l, and an inner correspondence in the obscurity of such a place as the Messiah's home-town. 7 13:3;4: 14;8:17;12:17;13: 14;15:7. Z Zahn finds iln-w~ (instead of rvoc) and the absence of ).e;y6v't'wv significant. He also interprets il't'L as causal, on the assumption it cannot introduce an indirect quotation (Introduction, II, 539, 56B; Mt, II2-II7). But it is doubtful the ancients made a sharp distinction between direct and indirect quotations. 3 IIpocp1)'t'oov has also been taken as a reference to the part of the OT canon so designated. But then Mt would surely have written ~v 't'OL~ n-pacp1)'t'ocL~, as in In 6:45 and Acts 13:40. The one case in point is Acts 15:15: KOCt't'O{l't'(tl O'U(LCPWVOiiO'LV ot MyOL 't'OOV n-poCP1)'t'oov, KOCeOO~ yEypOCn-'t'OCL. But perhaps there the quotation is to be considered one example from among other pertinent OT passages. V. Burch (Testimonies, II, 63) and Hunt (op. cit., 163) conjecture TtpoCP1)'t'oov is a name for the Testimony Book. H. J. Holtzmann (Die Synoptiker3 [Tiibingen, 1901], 194) and Bacon (Studies in Mt, 164) say that Mt simply did not know the origin of the citation-a very unlikely assumption, in view of his other citations of Is by name. 4 See Strack-Billerbeck, op. cit., I, 93-96. 6 See the Hodayoth (VI, 15; VII, 19; VIII, 6, B, 10); Gartner, op. cit., 23£.; 4Qplsa&.....J. M. Allegro, JBL, 75 (1956), IBo. 8 (Istanbul, 1957). 7 Stendahl stresses the apologetic motive behind Mt's defense of Jesus' coming from Nazareth (in Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche [J. Jeremias Festschrift; Berlin, 1960], 94-100).
I05
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
Is 8:23; 9:1 MT LXX
Mt 4:15,16
1,?:n n:!t'N '':il'lDl n:S:'N' ":1::m 1"nNTI1 c'n 1" 1,,'n ,:1:17 C',lTI ?'?l
y'ij ZIX~OUAOOV l(lXl y'ij N f;cp6IXA£(L
b8bv 61XA«GG"Il~ ~&PIXV TOU 'Iop8~vou
rlXAIAIXLIX TWV t6vwv
b
AlXb~
b
XIX6~(Lf;VO~
tV GXOTL -rOte; ~UxtX~ aou
-rij) xupLIj> -roue; ISpxoue; aou Cf. Num 30:3; Dt 23:22-24.
MT '37~Wn N"
~~w~
'j:'W' MT
tI,W,
"~'37'
'~"l
'EmopK~aeL for 't'ijl uljlt and 't'ouv literally renders 'l~"n against the spiritualizing interpretations of the LXX and the Targum. Needless difficulty has been caused by the supposition that the Matthaean context requires ~A.IX~ev and i~cXa'rlXaev to be taken in the sense of removal, which "!l0, it is said, cannot bear.2 See Anger, I, 14; H. Alford, The Greek TestamentO (London, 1868), I, 52. Deissmann thinks Mt transposes the verbs, since f3cxaTci~ELv renders NIDl in II Kings 18: 14; Job 21:3 (A) LXX; and in the four extant passages where Aquila uses the word, Is 40: II; 53:II; 66:12; Jer 10:5 (Bible Studies, 102f.). But Acx!-'-f3civELV is frequent for NIDl in the LXX, especially in Is; and in Is 53: I I Aq's f3cxa'rci~ELV stands for "!lO, not NID11 As Deissmann admits, he still has not gotten over the difficulty that "!lb does not mean "to take away." In similar fashion E. Massebieau thinks Mt transposes 'l~"n and 'l~!lN::l~ (Examen des citations de Z'Ancien Testament dans t'cvangile seton saint Matthieu [Paris, 1885], 19). This also is unnecessary, especially since the connotation of weakness in both cia6Evdcx and ~"n suits the words to each other. 1
B
IIO Mt 12:18-21 tSou 0 mx'Lt;; !Lou Bv llpE:'nacx
o«ycx1t7JT6t;; !Lou
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
Is 42:1-4 LXX 'Icxxw(3 0 71:cx'Lt;; !Lou «VTIAlj!LIji0!LCXI cx1hou 'Iapcx~A
0 £XAEXT6t;;
MT
Targ
'"r:l17 1il ,:1 1~nN ',,'n:l
Hag 2:23
Theod
tSou 0 71:cx'Lt;;l !Lou '"r:l17 Nil ae: llpE:'nacx 'n.,n:l 1:1 «VTIAljIjiO!LCXI CXUTOU l'1'l:l"PN
',,'n:l Is 41:8
o £XAEXT6t;;
!Lou
!Lou 71:pOCSESE:~CXTO
Ilv EuS6xlJCSEV Ij ljiuxlj !Lou
-Ij ljiuxlj !Lou
6ljcsCil TO 71:V&:U!LcX !LOU £71:' CXUT6v
£!SCilXCX TO 71:ve:U!L« !LOU £71:' CXUT6v
xcx1 Xp(CSIV
xp(alv
TO'Lt;; £!6v&:cslv d71:cxyye:ML oux I;p(ae:1 ouS~ xpcxuYcXae:1 ouS~ cixooa&:~ TIt;; l:v TCX'Lt;; 71:Acxn(cxlt;;
Toit;; e6v&:alV
CXUTOV
£~o(a&:1 ou xe:XpcX~e:TCXI ouS~ «vlja&:1 ouS~ cixoucs6ljae:Tcxl
£!~Cil
T-I)V «pCilV-IjV CXUTOU -Ij «pCilV~ cxu..ou XcXACX!LOV csuvnTpl!L- XcXACX!L0V Te:6ACXCS!LE:VOV !LE:VOV ou auvTp(Iji&:~ ou XCXTe:cX~&:~ xcx1 A(VOV Tu«p6!L&:vov xcx1 A(VOV xcx71:vl~6!Le:VOV
~Cilt;;
ou CS(3E:CS&:1 &v I;x(3cXAn e:tt;; VLXOt;;
ou cs(3E:a&:~ ••• eCilt;; &v 6li £71:1 T'ij~ yij~
T-IjV xp (CSIV xcx1 Tijl bv6!LCXTI CXUTOU £!6vlJ £A1tI0UCSIV
Xp(CSIV x0:1 £71:1 Tijl ' CXUTOU £!6v7) £A1tI0UCSIV
-
l'1n:l&., 'WDl 'nm
'm.,
",17
/Iv 2° BK*pc eth Eussemel] e:tt;; 8v KbCSLW e 565 700 pm; I;v ij) C*DalIrlat Tijl bv6!LCXTI] pr £V D it vg syr peSh , hk sah boh eth arm
Aq l'nK Is 44:2 '!l1"r'P m., /) -I)YCX71:lJ!LE:VOt;; tSou 0 SOUAOt;; !LOU 'm'17 l'''W' «VTIAljIjiO!LCXI £V
"DIlI~
'l'"r
C"l' K':l&" P17:l&' N' Kill' K" 17'~IlI' K" ym:l
l'~~l7'
,';I,p
y'!" l'1lP ":lIlI' N' l'1l'1::ll'1nlDD' ... l'1l:l::l' N';I C'lD' "r17 y'K:I "DIlI~
bv6!LCXT~
'17.,nN"r Bv -I)YcX71:lJacx Bv &:u86xlJa&:v l'1':1 ':ll'1K -Ij ljiuxlj !LOU
,.,~,~
,n"n" C"K ,';In" ~DlD~] ~DIlI~'
lQIs" boh
,n"n';l,] ,'n"n';l lQIsa
CXUTijl. . .e:U86XlJcs&:v Sym tSou /) SOUAOt;; !LOU civ6E~0!Lcxl CXUTOU /) £XAe:XT6t;; !LOU Bv e:US6xlJa&:v -Ij ljiuxlj !LOU
"1'
m:l&' N' ',::l' N" C,." N" N.,:I:I l'1'';Ip K'lml17 17'17, 'lp::l"r
Theod xcx1 aTI71:71:00V d!LCXUp6v ou cs(3e:a&:1
'::In'K' K'::l'llIm '~17 l':l&':I::l"r
Aq xcx1 A(VOV «!LCXUpov ou a(3E:ae:1
... 'D'" N';I Hab I: 4 l'pn'"r"r17 e:tt;; TE:AOt;; K17'K:I xp(!LCX Kl'"r il'n"'N" 1ml
~'n::l'
Sym ouS~
A£VOV ci!LcxupoV cs(3E:CS&:1
n:l&l' K:l&' Theod, Aq, Sym "DIlI~
xcxL Tijl v6!Lt:> CXUTOU l!6v7) (v7)aolrecte Pr.) £A1tI0UaIV 1 Text: Qsyh. Thdt says Theod has SOUAOt;;, as he has elsewhere for "r:ll7.
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
III
Although it is true that ,~c does not express the thought of taking away, nevertheless its connotation of burden-bearing is not opposed to the thought of removal. Even more to the point, the Matthaean context requires removal only from the sick to Jesus, but not a subsequent taking away. With this thought of transference the Hebrew words are perfectly in accord. Mt, then, presents a rendering of the Hebrew almost wholly independent from the LXX.1 Mt 9 :13; 12:7; Hos 6:6 LXXAQOr Ziegler Rahlfs: lAE:Ot; 6eAw xcxt ou 6uatcxv Hos 6:6 LXXBQcLuc Law boh eth arm Th Tert Cypr Ir1at Or1at Aug: k'AE:ot; 6EAW 'Jl) 6uatcxv MT: n:1T N" 'n:!l:Dn ,cn Targ: n~"~ '~'P N"17' N'C'n ":l17~
"H should be preferred as the original reading of the LXX, because it disagrees with the MT and because it agrees with the Targ'um. 2 Although it is possible Xott ou in LXXAQOr is a pre-Christian assimilation to the MT, the probability is that the reading is hexaplaric (for if Xott ou were original and better attested, it is difficult to see why Or1at should support ~ while Or supports Xott ou) and is influenced by the NT. If so, Mt independently renders the Hebrew.
Mt 12 :18-21, etc. Mt follows the LXX in having 1tot'Lc; rather than 80UAOC;,3 but he rejects 'Iotxw~ and 'IO'pot~A, for which the Hebrew has no equivalent and which one may even conjecture were not in the original text of the LXX, but were inserted by advocates of the collective inter1 K. F. Euler argues that Mt has utilized an older Septuagintal text which contained the interpretation that the Servant relieves mankind of physical sufferings, this interpretation ousted by the Christian view that Jesus' passion fulfils Is 53. Euler notes that iXp.cxp·dcx no where else in the LXX renders ',n, and TtE:pl -Ijp.i1iv b8uvcX't'CXL for C.,~C 'Il':lN~~' is curious (Die Verkundigung vom leidenden Gottesknecht aus J es 53 in der griechischen Bibel [Stuttgart, 1934], 59-63; Stendahl [pp. 106f.] cites H. S. Nyberg as following this view [Svensk Exegetisk Arsbok, 7 (1942), 13]). But the LXX Is-translatorfrequently indulges in exceptional renderings; and here he may have been influenced by verses 5 and 6, where sins are explicitly mentioned (Seeligmann, op. cit., 29). As Stendahl points out, the spiritualizing interpretation in the Targum makes quite unnecessary the conjecture that the spiritualizing interpretation in the LXX is a product of later, Christian correction (loc. cit.). I The following prefer ij: W. Staerk, ZWT, 40 (1897). 257; Zahn, Einl., II, 316; Hanel, op. cit., II7. T. W. Manson speaks favorably of it (BJRL, 34 [1951/52], 321). Whether original or not, ij is due to parallelism with the next clause (l~-ij). 8 On the waning use of TtCXLt; and the increasing employment of 80UAOt;, see P. Katz, TZ, 5 (1949), 17·
II2
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
pretation of the Servant from the parallel passages 41: 8, 9; 44: 2. Note that the OT Peshitta does not go with the present reading of the LXX. The similarity between Mt and Theodotion need not rest on an Ur-Theodotionic text. Both merely have an eye on the Hebrew text, rejecting the LXX's obvious interpolations. Furthermore, 7toti:c; in Theodotion is uncertain, and Mt's deviation from Theodotion in the next two phrases militates against a connection with Theodotion here. "0'.1 ~pS'l:Laot in Mt presents several possibilities. The evangelist may have understood ,~n in the sense of "taking hold of to acquire, to bring or adopt to oneself."l Very similar is the Targum: :'I~l~'j:'N, "I will bring him near." Or ottpe:'l:(~e:LV may anticipate the thought of hAe:X'l:6c; in the next phrase of the LXX. 2 Or parallel influence from Hag 2:23, where ae: ~pS'l:Laot (LXX) renders ~n.,n!l ,~, may enter. Yet again, Mt's Hebrew text may have read or he himself may have brought in'~ 'n'n~ from Is 44:2 (d. 41:8, 9: ,'n.,n~;.in both passages the LXX has 8'.1 &~e:Ae:~&IL'Y)V). 3 Since this provides a reason for Mt's aorist, against the future of the LXX and the imperfects of the MT and the Targum in Is 42: I, and since ottpe;'l:(~e:Lv is usual in the LXX for 'n~, the last view is preferable, with the added consideration that Mt brings in ,~ ~n'n~ not in place of ,~ ,~nN so much as by omission of the latter in anticipation of ~'~n~-to make room for 0 &.yot7tYj'l:6c; ILOU from the voice at Jesus' baptism 4 and transfiguration, where it stems from the Targum to Ps 2:7. 6 Thereby Mt has brought into focus the double signification of 'n~, choice and love. 6 Again, the parallel passages Is 44: 2; 41: 8, 9 contain the &'yot7t1J'l:6c;-motif and may have suggested or encouraged the insertion from the baptismal and transfiguration narratives. Mt rejects 7tpoae:~s~ot'l:O otu'l:6v in the LXX 7 and renders independently by 8'.1 e:uMxYjae:v. The agreement with Theodotion is not signifi1 So Massebieau, op. cit., 22. On ou xoc.t 'rore; watv oc.lhoov ~oc.peooc; ¥jxouaoc.v xoc.l '>ooe; bcp8oc.A!J.OOe; oc.u'roov ~xxci!J.!J.uaoc.v· !J.1}no're t800alv 'rore; bcp6oc.A!J.Ore; xoc.l 'rore; walv cX.xouaooalv xoc.t 'rii xoc.p8Lqc auvwalv xoc.l ~1tla'rpel\looalV xoc.l lciaolJ-oc.l oc.lhoue; LXX oc.u'roov 1°]om K*. oc.U'roov 2°] om B 393 Acts 1tOp. x. et1tOV 'rijl Aoc.ijl'rOU'r<jl] 1tOp. 1tpOe; 'rov Aoc.OV 'rOU'rov xoc.l eLn6v oc.U'roov 1°] om Mt IF: xoc.t cX.Voc.1tA'I}POU'roc.l oc.o'rorc; ~ 1tpocp'l}nLoc. 'Haoc.tou ~ Myouaoc. cX.Voc.1tA'I}POU'roc.l] 'run 1tA'I}poil'roc.l fI; 'r6n 1tA'I}poo8-1jae1'oc.l ~1t' Dpcit Mt omits 1topeu8'1}'r1 ... 'rou'r<jl, except in D it (et1tt). oc.O'roov 1° KC4l> 33 pc it syrsin , cur, peshsah boh eth ann] om rell Is 6:9,10 MT: :nJ,n "K' 'K' 'K" 'l~:ln "K' :!m~lU ':!J~lU ilm C:!J" m~K' 1" ,:1:1'" :!J~IV~ '~l1K:I' '~l~:!J:I ilK'~ lD :!JlVil '~l~:!J' ,:I:lil '~lTK' ilm C:!Jil :I" l~lVil ,,, KD" :l1V1 l':l~ :!J~~] ':!J~IV~ IQIsa ,:1:1"'] ,:1:1":1 lQIsa
The main question in this quotation concerns its genuineness. Objectors to its genuineness put forward several arguments: 3 I) The IF is un-Matthaean, containing two hapax legomena in Mt, cXVot7tA'Y)pOUV and 7tp0lp'Y)'t'e(ot. However, cXVot7tA'Y)POUV is common in the LXX (thirteen times) and elsewhere in Greek literature (Eur., Luc., Plat., Demos., Josephus, papyri). In I Esdras 1:54 the word occurs in exactly the sense required in Mt: de; cXVot7tA~p(J)O'LV 'rOU 1 J. Kennedy, op. cit., 12. Cf. Job 2: 10, where el in the LXX presupposes tlK instead of the MT's til (also Zech 3:7). An imperfectly formed K sometimes resembles 1 (ibid., 36). Chr. Wordsworth suggests ~8v'l} is a Hellenizing reading, for v'ijaol would not give the intended meaning "Gentiles" to the Greek ear (The Greek Testament [London, 1874], I, 42). B Against Schlatter, op. cit., 4oIf.; Bacon, Studies in Mt, 474 f.; Kilpatrick, Origins, 94; Jeremias, The Servant of God, 80; T. W. Manson, BJRL, 34 (1951/52),323. On the other hand, omission of the verse in min. 33 provides a legitimate, but not sufficient basis for this view. a See Torrey, Documents, 66f.; Stendahl, 13If.; S. E. Johnson, op. cit., I37f .
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
II7
P~(lct't'ot;
't'OU XUp(oU E'V 0''t'6(lct't'L 'Ie:pe:(l(ou. We cannot assume, therefore, that eX'Vct7tA"y)POU'V was foreign to Mt's vocabulary. Rather, the prefixing of eX'VcX., the vivid present tense in Mt, and the first position show a deliberate emphasis on the word; i.e., the quotation, partially fulfilled in Isaiah's generation, now receives a full measure of ful- i filment. Also, the immediately preceding allusive quotation of the same passage in Is 1 necessitated a more emphatic IF for the full, explicit quotation-to save from awkwardness and anticlimax. As for 7tpoCjl"Y)'t'e:£q. although it occurs in the sense of written aT prophecy elsewhere in the NT only in II Pet I: 20, yet it is often used throughout the aT and NT of the prophetic message, a distinction between written and oral not in view. Even in the sense of written aT prophecy Mt was by no means the first to use 7tpoCjl"Y)'t'e:toc ysypct7t't'ctL E'V 't'n 7tpOCjl"Y)'t'e:£q. 'HO'cttou (II Chron 32: 32 LXX); 't'~t; 7tpoCjl"Y)'t'e:tctt; AtJ.wt; (Tob. 2: 6); ctt 7tpOCjl"Y)'t'e:LctL = the second section of the aT canon in Sir. prot. 18. 2) The great difference between Cod. D and other MSS points to the ungenuineness of the quotation. Cf. Mt 27: 35, where !l. 0 fr f13 at it vgc1t; = Jn 19: 24 in the quotation of Ps 22: 19 LXX. As is obvious, however, parallel influence is rife in Cod. D throughout these verses and verse 13. The phrase E7t' ctU't'OLt; in D (against the simple dative) reveals a Semitic background. 2 Presumably, then, the harmonistic and Semitic elements betray Tatianic influence on Cod. D. The lack of manuscript evidence for omission of Mt 13: 14, 15 destroys the parallel with the textual situation in Mt 27: 35. 3) The lengthy quotation here is tautological after the allusive quotation in verse 13. But it is not likely Mt abridged Mk's allusion, omitting the entire last clause, without compensation; for elsewhere he is usually more expansive in quotation material. We must rather assume that verse 13 leads up to the formal quotation in verses 14, 15. This can be seen in verse 13 in the causal g't'L (against t'Vct in Mk, Lk, and In), which harmonizes with the ycX.p-clause of the Septuagintal quotation to follow. If verses 14, 15 were an interpolation, we should almost have to say that an original t'Vct in verse I
V. 13 inMt (parMk4:12). See above, pp. 33-35. In statements concerning what the scripture says about certain people, ?SJ was regularly used. See W. Bacher, Die exegetische Terminologie der judischen Traditionsliteratur (Leipzig, 1899), I, 5; B. M. Metzger, JBL, 70 (1951), 300; C. Taylor, op. cit., p. xiv. Cf. esp. I Kings 2: 27, where K?b in the meaning of fulfilment is construed with the clause, "which he spoke ?SJ the house of Eli." 1
B
uB
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
13 was changed to /S'n to conform with the interpretation of the LXX. This requires too much cleverness on the part of the interpolator. 4) The pure Septuagintal form is out of character with Matthaean formula-citations. Not so, for I: 23 is almost and perhaps wholly Septuagintal. And if individual phrases and entire clauses agree with the LXX against the MT in other formula-citations, a whole citation in the Septuagintal style should occasion no surprise. S) The exact agreement with Acts, even in the omission of the first otu't"Cw [but this is textually disputed in MtJ, shows the quotation has been interpolated from Acts. However, because of an identical purpose to show the OT passage has already been fulfilled, for which the Hebrew is not suitable, Mt and Acts may independently follow the same Septuagintal text, represented by Cod. N* in its omission of the first otu't"wv in Is against its own reading in Mt. Moreover, in interpolation one would have expected the introductory 7topEo61j't"L ..• 't"oo't"
IXPIXW ••• XIX1 ~~l)nL
Tb nlXLBtov TOU cinoMolXL IXUT6 • • • XlXl a.vE:xwP"llaE:v
a.VE:AE:LV MCJ)ua~v . 'AvE:)(wP"IlOE: Be ..•
MT
•.. il:s7'D V1j:':l" illD~ nN l'il? n':l"
The Midrash Rabba on the birth of Moses in Ex tells of Pharaoh's astrologers perceiving that the mother of Israel's redeemer was pregnant. Not knowing if the redeemer was to be Israelite or Egyptian, Pharaoh ordered all children from henceforth to be drowned. But when the Egyptians remonstrated, the edict was restricted to Israelitish infants. Since this story was known to Josephus,:a it was current in apostolic times and may well have suggested the Moses-Jesus parallel here and in verses 20, 2I. In the choice of cXn UU(..IoL and in the use of the articular infinitive Mt renders the Hebrew independently from the LXX.s Mt 2:20,21
Ex 4:19,20 MT
XlXl nopE:uou
1? :lID
£It; Y'iiv 'IoplXl)A n6vl)XlXoLV yeip ol ~"IlTOUVTE:t; T~V tjlU)(~V TOU nlXLBtou Be • • • nlXpeAIX~E:v Tb nlXLB£ov xlXl T~V IL"IlTeplX IXUTOU l(lXl E:!a'ijA6E:v £It; Y'iiv 'IaplXl)A
C"~~
'n~
':I C'1D1Nil ?:I !:I"VIP:lDil 1IDD1nN illD~
np"
,nIDN nN ... "1:l nN' :lID" !:I"~~ il~'N
LXX ~eiBL~E:
&nE:A6E: £It; A!yunTov TE:6vl)xlXaLv yeip neivTE:t; ol ~"IlTOUVT&t; GOU T~V ojIuXl)V &.vIXM~CJ)V Be MCJ)ua'iit; ~v YUVIXLXIX xIX1 Tei nIXLB£IX ... xIX1 ~neaTpE:ojIE:V £It; A!yunTov
In Mt the Hebraistic ~'Y)'t'e:i:v TIJV t/lux~v and the plural 't'E:6V~XotO"LV yap ot ~'Y)'t'ouv't'e:aou) and in construction with 't'~v 1 See Tert., Adv. Mat'c., iii. 13. 8; Adv. Jud., ix. 12; Lagrange, Mt, 20, 31; Edersheim, Life and Times, I, 203. I Ant. II. ix. 2. On the Midt'ash, see G. H. Box, ZNW, 6 (1905), 89. 8 See M. S. Enslin, JBL, 59 (1940), 332; Lohmeyer-Schmauch, op. cit., 31, n. I, for this allusion. An allusive quotation here might have been doubted but for the clear allusion to Ex 4: 19, 20 in Mt 2 : 20, 2 I.
131
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
ljJux~v
must reflect Ex.l So also does the fact that "land of Israel" occurs only here in the NT, answering to C"~~ i1~·nt. The LXX is reflected in the omission of C'lDlNi1. But in the choice of 7topeoecr6<XL, 7t<xp<x:A<X(L~&.veLV, and etcrepxecr6<XL Mt translates independently from the LXX, which would have been suitable. "A7te:A6e and E7tecr't'peljJev would have provided even better shades of meaning than the words Mt chooses. However, Mt is closer to the Hebrew in rendering "P" by a finite verb rather than by a participle and in retaining i1~'N, omitted by the LXX. Mt 3:4
Mk 1:6
II Kings 1 : 8 LXX
ct6't"b~ 3E: /) 'IwcXvv7J~ etx,ev 't"b !v3UfLct ct6't"ou a.7tb 't"PLX,(;iv xctfL7))..oU xctl ~WV7JV 8epfLa't"tv7Jv 7tepl 't"1)V ba~uv a6't"ou
xctl ijv () 'IwcXvv7J~
a.v-IJp
Ev8e8ufLEvo~ 't"ptX,ct~
3ctau~
XctfL7))"OU xal ~WV7Jv 3epfLa't"tV7Jv 7tepl 't"-I]v bacpuv ct6't"ou
xctl ~wv7JV 8ePfLa't"tv7JV 7tepLe~WafLevo~ ba~uv ct6't"ou
't"-I]v
MT ID'N
'~::I
'~ID
"TN' ,,~
"TN "ln~::I
't"ptx,aV1jV 8ep!L«'t'(v1jv 7tept (LXX: -etwa!Levoc;) 't'~v oacpuv «?!'t'ou is Septuagintal. But 't'o ev8u!L« «?!'t'ou «7tO 't'PLXWV X«!L~AOU alludes to the Hebrew expression '37111 '37.:1 ("lord of hair"). The LXX interprets the Hebrew to mean that Elijah was a hairy man ( Xor.TeX T7JV Ttpii~LV or.UTOU Ttpii~LV] TeX. ~pyor. K·F 1 28 allat syr cop arm Cyril Chrys Ambr Ps 62 (61): 13 LXX: ISTL au dTt03wO'&LI; ~xcXaTCj> Xor.TeX. TeX. ~pyor. or.UTOU MT: 'l"IW37~:l tD'K';I tI';Iwn l"InK ':l Prov 24: 12 LXX: I\~ dTt03l3ooO'LV Ex&.aTCj> Xor.TeX. TeX. ~pyoc OCUTOU MT: ,';I37£):l tI'K';I !l"Win T7JV
This allusion is extremely common, occurring also in Tanch. "';ltD', 30.1303 and, in accordance with the LXX (TOC ~pyoc), in Ro 2:6; II Tim 4:14; Rev 2:23; 20:12; II Clem II:6 (TWV ~Py(uv). The reading TOC ~pyoc in Mt is thus influenced by the prevailing text elsewhere. This makes the original reading, T~V 7tpii~LV, stand out all the more in its non-Septuagintal character. T~v 7tpii~LV is a successful attempt to render the collective singular in the Hebrew by a corresponding singular in the Greek. A. L. Williams, Mt, II, II. In 'p"~~ in the MT, the mem is the sign of the participle. Theod and perhaps Mt take it as the preposition 1~. 3 Cited by Schlatter, op. cit., 524. 1
B
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
139
M t 18: 16: tVct ~7tl a't'6ILct't'0~ 860 ILctP't'upoov of) 't'p~(;iv a-rct6'ii 7ta.v ~'ijILct ILctP't'upoov] om Dd; trps with 860 LI24pc; post 't'p~(;iv Ne I 700 pc Dt 19: 15 LXXB: ~7tl a't'6ILct't'0~ 860 ILctPTUPOOV Kctl ~7tl aT6ILct't'0~ Tp~(;iV ILctPTUPOOV a't'~a«ct~ 7ta.v P'ijILct ILctpTUPOOV 1°] om Luc (75) arm CyrH Kctl ~7tl a't'6ILctTo~] f) Luc (75bw) ILctP't'upoov 2°] om bw a~a&'t'ct~] aTct6~a&'t'ct~ AFMNe Luc MT: '!l' C'p' C"37 illU?w'D '37'N C"37 'llU 'D '37 'D '37 2°] om 3 MSS Ken, 3 MSS De-R, vg, both arabic texts of Saadia, Targ Jon II Cor 13: I: ~7tl a't'6ILa:'t'0~ 860 ILctPTUpOOV Ka:l 't'p~(;iv a't'ct6~a&Tctl 7ta.v P'ijILa: Kctt] 'Il N (it) I Tim 5: 19: ~l(TO~ &! IL~ ~7tl 860 f) 't'p~(;iv ILctP't'upoov
When allowance is made for ~VIX with the subjunctive, Mt's text 1 agrees wholly with Lagarde's discredited Lucianic text (bw). It is doubtful that Mt utilized the Lucianic text represented by 75 in ~ and the omission of ~7tt (J't'6jJ.IX't'oc; (2°), because in 75 these are necessitated by the omission of the first ILIXP't'OpWV, an omission Mt does not share. 2 The passive form of the verb is well-attested in the LXX. nav may represent a lost ,~ in the Hebrew. s Or insertion of 7taV may be a natural way of overcoming the awkwardness in Greek of the Semitic idiom." Mt has either utilized an Ur-Lucianic text of the type represented by b w, or translated directly from a Semitic text which omitted the second 'D '37. Mt's omission of the second "witnesses" against all Semitic texts and the over-all agreement with II Cor 13: I (except, possibly, for xlXq favor the former possibility. The passive c"pn' in the Targums corresponds to Mt's (J't'1X67j; but this must not be pressed, because (J't'1X6~(Je:'t'IXL in the Septuagintal tradition is also passive. Eoo~ ~~80IL'rJl(ovd.KL~ ~7tT& ~7tT&] ~7t't'&K~~ D Gen 4: 24 LXX: ~~80IL'rJl(ov't'&l(L~ ~7tT&
Mt 18: 22:
*
MT: il37!lIU' C'37!l1U 1 The total omission of ILa:P't'upoov in Dd, although the most difficult reading, must be regarded as a slip; for it is not likely to have been original. Both other variants in Mt are stylistic, seeking to draw together 8uo and
Tp~(;iV. B I Tim 5: 19 agrees with 75, but perhaps only because both are stylistically motivated. Cf. Ne I 700 pc in Mt. 8 See above, p. 76, n. 3, on addition and omission of ,~. 4 Torrey, Documents, 73. Cf. 7ta.v before P'ijILa: for the indefinite '!l' in Gen 18: I4 LXXLuc (15).
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
Out of Lamech's formula of revenge Jesus makes a formula of forgiveness. 1 E. J. Goodspeed has strongly defended the meaning 70+7 in agreement with Gen 4:24, as opposed to 70x7.2 He argues that 70x7 would be E~8o!1:rp,ovTcXXLI; E1tTcXXLI; (so Cod. D* in Mt). The single occurrence of the suffix -XLI; shows the meaning is 70+7, as confinned by this same translation in the LXX for the Hebrew 70+7 (Gen 4:24). Generally in the NT xed is not added after numbers from twenty to ninety (e.g., Jn 6: 19). 'E~8o(l~XOVTot with an accompanying numeral in the sense of addition occurs in Lk 10: I, 17; Acts 7: 14; 27: 37-and xotl is always absent. The understanding 70+7 by Origen, Augustine, and the Gospel of Hebrews (fragment quoted by Jerome) more than compensates for the understanding 70x7 in the Testament of Benjamin 7:4. Mt 21: 14: xoi:l Ttpoaij)'80VI'J.UTij> TUcp).ot Xl'J.t )((0)).01. ~v Tij> te:pij> II Sam 5: 8 LXX: TUCP).OI. KI'J.I. )((0)).01. oux dae:).e:uaOVTI'J.L de; otxov KUp(O\J MT: n~:ln,N N':I~ no!:), "mJ
N'
The aT text is probably a gloss inserted to explain the exclusion of mendicants from the Temple. 3 Mt follows the LXX in taking n~:ln as a reference to the Temple.' The allusion displays a kind of antithetic typology. David hated the blind and the lame,6 who came to be excluded from the Temple. The greater Son of David receives the blind and the lame within the Temple and heals them, thus making them fit to be there. Mt 21: 41: OrTLVEe; dTt08 CXUTOU MT: 'n»:lln~ '~'D 'IZIN 1 See W. Vischer, Die evangelische Gemeindeoydnung Mt 16, 13-20, 28 (Zollikon-Zurich, 1946), 74. Z Problems of NT Translation (Chicago, 1945), 29-31. See also MoultonHoward, Grammar, I, 98, II, 175; Moulton & Milligan, op. cit.,'s.v. E~80!L1J XOVTcXXLc;; BI-D § 248:2. 3 See S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of SamuelS (Oxford, 1913), 260f.; B. D. Eerdmans, The Hebrew Book of Ps (Oudtestamentische Studien, IV; Leiden, 1947), 504. Dalman denies the blind and the lame were thus excluded (Sacred Sites and Ways [London, 1935], 288ff.), but see Acts 3:2,8. , For n~:I alone as a temple, see I Kings 6: 5; Is 44: 13; 66: I. In the proverbial context n~:ln (note the article) was naturally understood as the house of Yahweh. The Targum retains the unexpanded expression, but spiritualizes the preceding with reference to sinners (N~~:I~~", N~~NUn). 6 In II Sam, the Jebusites are so sure of their position that they contemptuously tell David that even their blind and lame can keep David and his men outside the walls. The point of David's answer is that even the Je-
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM
Mt smooths the word order and in the plurals assimilates to his context (vv. 34, 43). Minor divergences from the LXX are the compound verb and the article with xIXLPOi:C;.l Mt 22: 34: ouvl))(fl'ljoIXV ~7tl ~O lXu~6]
~7\"l ~O lXu~6 D it sYI s1n , our
E7t' lXu~6v
Acts 4: 26; Ps 2: 2 LXX: xlXl ol &p)(ovn:c; ouvl))(6'ljoIXV ~7\"l ~O MT: 'n~ "tm tl~lT'"
lXu~6
The above-adopted reading in Mt has been suspected of assimilation to the OT text, especially in view of Acts 4: 26. 2 But comparison of Mt and the Marcan parallel (12:28 ff.) shows Mt has rearranged the wording to gain an allusion to Ps 2: 2. In Mk one of the scribes comes, hears the discussion with the Sadducees, and asks his question. In Mt, the Pharisees, having heard of Jesus' discussion with the Sadducees, gather together first, and only then does one of them ask his question. Therefore, we must regard the Western reading as a characteristic harmonization to auv~ylXYov &7t' lXu't'6v in Mt 27: 27, or an error due to the similarity of the phrases and the naturalness with which &7t' lXu't'6v blends into the flow of thought. Mt is in strict agreement with the LXX in the use of auv&ye:LV for 'O~ (niphal: "to hold council") and &7t~ 't'o lXu't'6 ("to the same place") for 'n~ ("together"). 3 Mt 23: 19: ~O 6UOLIXO~PLOV ~O ciYL&.~OV ~O lloopov Ex 29: 37 LXX: mic; 6 ci7\"~6!Le:voc; ~oij 6UOLIXOTIjp(ou MT: IZ"r~ n::n~!1 17111'1 ?:;:)
ciYLIX06l)oe:~IXL
Mt takes the indeterminate Hebrew as a thing, the offering; the LXX, the OT Peshitta, and the Targums (except the Old Palestinian) understand a person, the priest. Mt and the LXX agree with the MT,' the Old Palestinian Targum,5 and rabbinical tradition 6 in understanding that whatever or whoever touches the altar shall become holy on contact; the OT Peshitta and Targums Jonathan and Onkelos understand that consecration is prerequisite for the priest busites' strongest warriors (hated by David) will be as helpless as the blind and the lame before his attack. 1 I owe the notice of this allusion to Lagrange, lVIt, 417. 2 Merx, op. cit., I, i, p. 312; Lagrange, Mt, 430; Torrey, The Four Gospels, 295· 8 In Ps 31 (30): 14 the LXX has ~v ~ OUVIX)(6ijVIXL IXU~OUC; O!!LIX for 'n~ tl'O'I'I!1. 4 Kal. For the same understanding the verb may be pointed as a niphal, 1V1re~. Cf. Ex 29:43. 6 IZ"r "'n~. The marginal reading conforms to the other Targums. 8 H. Danby, The Mishnah (Oxford, 1933), 481 (Zeb. 9.1); Strack-Billerbeck, op. cit., I, 932.
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
who touches the altar.l Mt, then, is dependent upon the Hebrew and may show contact with the Old Palestinian Targum. Mt 24: 10: Kelt -r6-re: aXIX1I31X).La6~aOIl-rIXL 7tO).).OL Dan I I :41 LXX om] .:«. xIX1 7t0).).1X1 aKIX1I31X).La6~aoll-rIXL 88-syh Theod: xIX1 7t0).).01 aa6e:II~aOl)aLIi MT: "!Z)~' n':1"
+
The hexaplaric addition in the LXX may be disregarded. Mt agrees with Theodotion in the masculine 7tOAAO( against the feminine of the MT; but his aXotV8cxALae~O'OV't'otL agrees with the MT against Theodotion's poor rendering, cXO'ee:v~aouaw. Mt 25: 31 : xIX1 7teivnc; ot clyye:).OL ILE:-r' IXU-rOU clYYE:).OL] pr clYLOL A W fI3 700 al bohpcc; Zech I4: 5 LXX: xed 7teivne; ot clYLOL 1Le:-r' I1U-rOU MT: '~l7 O'ID'P ,~ Targ: l'1'~'l7 'mlD"p ,~, I Thess 3: 13: lLE:d: 7ttXV-r6111 -rOOIi IiYL61V I1U-rOU
Mt works from a Hebrew text (also attested by the LXX, the OT Peshitta, the Vulgate, and the Targum) which reads the waw conjunctive before ,~ and the third personal pronoun with the preposition. The MT must be corrupt, for" Jehovah my God shall come, and all the holy ones with thee" does not make good sense. Unlike Paul, who adopts 't'wv Ocytwv from the LXX, Mt interpretatively (and correctly) renders tI'!Z),p by ot &yyeAoL. Mt 25:35,36
Is 58:7 LXX
~7te:£lIlXalX y.xp ~3&>xlX-r£ ILOL ~3LIjI'1)alX xIX1 ~7to-rLalX-r£ 1Le:
3Lei6pl)7tn 7tE:LIlOOIl-rL -rov clp-rOIi aOI)
xI11 cplXye:ill
~£1I0e; fjlL'1)lI xIX1 aUV'1)ya.ye:-rE IJ.E: YUlLvoe; xIX1 7te:PLe:~a.).e:-re 1Le: ~a6£II'1)alX xIX1 ~7te:axeljll1a6e 1Le: ~II CPI).IXX'ij fjlL'1)V xIX1 fj)'61X-re: 7tp6e; 1Le:
xIX1 7t-r61I(OOe; a.a-reyoue; e:lalXye: de; -rOil oYx611 aou ~.xv f3ne; YUILlloli 7te:P£~IX).e:
xIX1 a.7tO -rOOIi OtXe:£6111 -rou a7tEPILIX-r6c; aOI) oUI( u7te:p6Ij1n
MT
C'D
K";'
17:ln, :1l7,'
tI"l37, n':1 K':1n tI,l7 ;'K,n ,~ O""~
'n'c~,
1'!z):1~'
O'17nn K'
The Matthaean passage is a targumic adaptation of Is 58:7. To the thought of feeding the hungry is added that of giving drink to 1 This is the significance of the passive stems in the OT Pesh (lD'pnl) and Targums Jon and Onk (lD'pn'). Cf. Ex 19:22; II Sam 11:4; II Chron 5: II; 29: 15. Perhaps a pual pointing is presupposed, lrJ1K~' Cf. II Chron 26:18; 31:6; Is 13:3; Ezek 48:11.
143
EXAMINATION OF THE TEXT-FORM I
the thirsty. Unsheltered poor who are taken in become unsheltered strangers. The thought of clothing the naked remains unchanged. Taking notice of one's own is expanded into visiting the sick and the imprisoned. 1 Mt 25:46 x(d (bU:Ae:UOOIITCXt OUTOt de; X6ACXOtll
cxllblltoll ot 8£ 8£xcxtot de; ~w~v cxllblltoll
Dan 12:2 LXX ot 8£ de; olle:t8t0f/.611 ot 8£ e:le; 8tcxonopa.1I xcxl cxloJ(uv"lj1l cxllblltov ot f/.£II e:le; ~W~II cxllbvtov
~
Theod xcxl OUTOI de; olle:t8tof/.l!1I xcxt elc; CX!OJ(UII"lj1l cx!lbvtov OUTOI de; ~w~v cx!lbvtOIl
MT
II
1'Ko,,37 '" I
~
l'I'K
~~"' 0"37
Mt reverses the order of the phrases. n1D'", "reproach," comes from '1'", "to pluck oft (fruit)." K6AOtO'LV comes from xoAcX.~e;w, "to prune off." The similar horticultural connotation in the root meanings of both words may provide the basis for the Greek translation. 2 Ot ~HXOtLOL stems from the following verse in Dan. 3 The final phrase agrees with the LXX, Theodotion, and the MT. That we should have another allusion to Dan 12 at the very end of the Olivet Discourse in Mt points to the unity of the Matthaean version. That is, it shows the inner connection of the latter part, peculiar to Mt, with that which Mt has in common with Mk, where allusions to Dan II and 12 abound. Mt 26: 15: ot 8£ ~OT"ljOCXV CXUTijl TPI!XXOVTCX tipyuptCX tipyuptcx] aTcxT'ijpcxe; Dabqrl, 2; OTCXT. tipyup£ou fI h Zech II: 12 LXX: )tcxl ~OT"ljOCXII Tl!1I f/.to66v f/.ou Tpt!XXOIITCX tipyupoue; MT: '10~ O"ID'ID ~'~ID 11K "PID~'
The use of ta'rcivOtL for 'PID in the meaning "to weigh out (money)" 1 The oft-noted parallel to Mt 25:35,36, Test. Joseph i. 5-7, is due to influence from the NT. since the present form of the Testaments probably post-dates the NT (J. T. Milik, Ten Years of Discover)! in the Wilderness of Judaea [London, 1959], 34f.; idem RB, 62 [1955], 398-406; M. de Jonge, in Studia Evangelica, 546-556; M. Burrows. More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls, 179f.; Kahle, The Cairo Genizah 2 , 27; P. W. Skehan, CBQ. 21 [1959]. 73). OT influence in Mt is more likely than influence from the Testaments. a K6Acxote; cxllbvtoe; occurs in Test. Reub. v. 5; Asher vii. 5. But see the preceding note. S See above, p. 138.
144
THE TEXT-FORM OF THE QUOTATIONS
is very common in the LXX. 'Apyuptoc is poor Greek as compared with tXpyupOUt; 1 and shows independence from the LXX. Mt 26: 52: .,;a.v"t'e:~ ycXp ot A<x~6v"t'e:~ !J.a.X<XlP<XV EV !J.<XX<xLp1l &''';OAOUVT<XI Is 50: I I LXX: laoo .,;a.VTe:~ u!J.e:i~ .•. x<XTUJxue:Te
