The Gospel of Mark: The New Christian Jewish Passover Haggadah 9789004508897, 9004508899

Citation preview

STUDIA POST-BIBLICA VOLUMEN OCTAYUM

STUDIA POST-BIBLICA ADIUVANTIBUS

J. BOWMAN · J. HOFTIJZER · T. JANSMA · H. KOSMALA K. H. RENGSTORF · J. COERT RIJLAARSDAM G. SEVENSTER · D. WINTON THOMAS G. VAJDA · G. VERMES EDIDIT

P. A. H. DE BOER

VOLUMEN OCTAVUM

LEIDEN E.]. BRILL 1965

THE GOSPEL OF MARK THE NEW CHRISTIAN JEWISH PASSOVER HAGGADAH

BY

JOHN BOWMAN

LEIDEN E. J. BRILL

1965

Copyright r965 by E.]. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or translated in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without written permission from the publisher.

PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

iliin::i iniN~1 oipi~ l"NiV Mekhilta Beshallah 40b

JN~

TO THE STUDENTS OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND ANTIQUITIES III DEPARTMENT OF SEMITIC STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE SESSION 1962 AND 1963 FOR WHOM THIS BOOK WAS WRITTEN

CONTENTS page

Brief Introduction. . . .

XIII

PART ONE:

PROLEGOMENA Novum Testamentum latet in Vetere Mark's Gospel and the Old Testament. Q and the Old Testament Jesus Himself according to Mark's Gospel teaches that He is fulfilling Old Testament Prophecy .

3 8 12

Peter and Mark's Gospel. The Law: Halakhah and Haggadah The Law and the Supernatural v Hopes of Deliverance based on the Exodus . VI The Targum of Isaiah 53 and the Messiah 1. The Kingdom of Heaven i.e. the Kingdom of God and the Law. 2. Miracles .

21 31 44 53 65

I

1. 2. 3. 4.

II III IV

15

74 76

Miracles and the Exodus, in the Old Testament and the 77 Passover Haggadah . . . . . . . . . 90 Purpose its VIII The Gospel of St. Mark and 101 The Synagoge in Judaism . . . . . . VII

PART TWO:

COMMENTARY ON MARK'S GOSPEL IX Mark Chapters 1-4:34 1. Mark chapter 1 . 2. Mark chapter 2 . . 3. Mark chapter 3 . . 4. Mark chapter 4:1-34.

105 105 113 118 131

x

CONTENTS

X

Mark Chapters 4:35-6:56. 1. Mark chapter 4:35-41 2. Mark chapter 5 . 3. Mark chapter 6 . .

141 141 142 148

Mark chapter 7-9 :50. 1. Mark chapter 7 . . 2. Mark chapter 8 . . 3. Mark chapter 9:1-50.

160 160 174 189

Mark Chapters 10-12:44 1. Mark chapter 10 . . 2. Mark chapters 11:1-12:12 3. Mark chapters 12:13-12:44 .

208 208 221 226

XIII

Mark Chapter 13 . . .

239

XIV

Mark Chapters 14:1-52. 1. Mark chapter 14:1-26 2. Mark chapter 14:27-52.

254 254 275

Mark Chapters 14:53-15:19, 40-16:9 . 1. Mark chapter 14:53-65. 2. Mark chapter 14:66-72 . . 3. Mark chapter 15:1-19 . . 4. Mark chapter 15:40-16:9.

284 284 295 297 308

XI

XII

XV

Epilogue. . . .

314

Detached Notes.

317

A. B. C.

D. E.

The paragraphing of Vaticanus and Archbishop Carrington' s theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 Canon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322 Maimonides. Translations of sections of Maimonides' Hilkhoth Talmud Torah, e.g. ch. I:8,9,10,11 on the duty of studying Torah and what time must be spent thereon and how. Ch. 4:3,4,5; ch. 5:5,7,8,9 on how the Rabbi taught, and one's duty to one's Rabbi and what he taught 326 The celebration of Passover in Judaism 330 Midrash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334

CONTENTS

F. G. H.

Scribes, Pharisees and Haberim . Elijah . . . . . . . . . . . . Scriptural allusions in Sepher Elijahu I. 'After Three Days' . . . . . . . . J. Explanations of some technical terms: 1. Baraitha. 2. Darshan. 3. Haggadah. 4. Hakham. 5. Halakhah. 6. Maggid. 7. Meturgeman. 8. Amoraim. 9. Mishnah. 10. Setam. 11. Talmid. 12. Talmud. 13. Tanna. 14. Targum. 15. Torah. 16. Oral Law.

XI

337 341 346 347

353

Bibliography

359

Indexes . .

364

I II

III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

Scriptural References 1. Old Testament . . 2. New Testament . Rabbinic References . 1. Mishnah and Tosefta 2. Talmud . . . . . 3. Midrashim, Codes . 4. Targumim . . . . References to Dead Sea Discipline Manual and Zadokite Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha . References to Josephus. . . . . . . . . References to Philo . . . . . . . . . . References to Greek versions and Peshitta Subject Index . . . . . Index of Personal Names Index of Place Names . .

364 364 369 378 378 379 380 381 381 381 382 382 382 384 389 393

BRIEF INTRODUCTION There are many commentaries on the Gospel of Mark, old and new. Undoubtedly many more are yet to be written. This century has seen very varied approaches to the Marean Gospel and to the Synoptics in general, ranging from emphasis on the general accuracy of the Marean chronology for the historical events of the Saviour's life to a rejection not only of such, but even a virtual denial that we have any of the ipsissima words of Jesus. The present author is aware of his indebtedness to both Synoptic Criticism and Form Criticism, and even to those who stress the place of the Calendar in shaping the Gospel. He cannot accept that Mark gives any accurate guide to the chronological order of events of the Ministry. He is willing to allow that the sayings of Jesus may indeed have been thought to have been preserved close to the form in which they were delivered. But the situation or occasion in which they now feature in the Gospel account may bear no relation to that in which they were first said. The acts of Jesus and His miracles may rest on a foundation of fact but have all been later reinterpreted. There is nothing new in such views. What is new is that the present writer sees the form of not only the individual incidents of the Life and Ministry determined by Midrash on selected Old Testament passages, but the form of the whole Gospel itself determined by such. The present writer has felt that the question of the Gospel Form as a whole, and not individual parts thereof, has not received the attention it deserves. While Archbishop Carrington and others with the theory of individual Gospels for each Lord's Day, and Van Goudoever with his Calendar Theory, have sought to explain some elements in the overall Gospel form, they do not convincingly provide a raison d'etre for the Gospel. They are right to note the liturgical application of the Gospel, but overstress it and ante-date it. One must look for a more internal, more compelling reason for the shape of the Gospel of Mark than the provision of weekly Gospel readings in the Christian Religious Calendar. In the case of Mark in particular, it is most doubtful if such can be proved. But is there anything within Mark's Gospel, not imposed on later from without, which gives it its shape? If one were to reply: 'The life of Jesus as it actually was' or even 'the life of Jesus as understood in the Early Church', such answers raise more questions than

XIV

BRIEF INTRODUCTION

they solve. What do we mean by 'actually was' and at what level of existence? Or if it is the life of Jes us as understood in the Church, when and in what Church? For not even the Synoptists agree and the J ohannine presentation is so different. We are faced with the fact of Mark's Gospel. Arguments for its organic unity are at least as strong as those that it is a concatenation of disjecta membra. And even if it were the latter, why have they been put together in the form they are? It is not a biography, though it may be an interpretation of a life and work, but highly stylized and rigorously subordinated to a certain pattern. But what pattern? The needs of the whole liturgical year of the Jewish Church are too diffuse to explain the tight unity of Mark's Gospel. Only one Festival clearly stands out in Mark's Gospel, the Passover, the Memorial of the Exodus Deliverance from bondage in the past and pattern of all future deliverances. The Passover too is the Festival of the Home primarily, and not of Temple or Synagogue. The Church is rooted in the Home. At a Passover celebration there is the Passover Haggadah, the story of deliverance, which begins with the Promise, retails the struggles of the deliverer with the oppressor and culminates with the deliverance he wrought. The Passover Haggadah with all its diversity but underlying unity provided the pattern not merely for the Last Supper, but for the whole of Mark's Gospel form. What better than the Passover Haggadah, a uniquely Jewish oral literary form, to give shape to the story of the long awaited Messianic Deliverance, and to gather up in itself stories of the Saviour, His words and deeds of power, which led to His Exodus. My thanks are due to Mrs. M. Macfarlane, Secretary of the Department of Semitic Studies, and Miss E. Marso, Secretary for External Studies, Department of Semitic Studies, for their great help and co-operation in the typing of this work. Melbourne, 29 Oct. 1963

]OHN BOWMAN

PART ONE

PROLEGOMENA

CHAPTER ONE

1. NOVUM TESTAMENTUM LATET IN VETERE Luke ch. 24:13-35 tells of two of the disciples of Jesus who went to Emmaus on the day of the Resurrection. They were discussing the tragic events of the last week. A stranger (who was according to the Gospel narrative actually the risen Jesus) joined them and asked why they were so sad. They expressed surprise that the stranger did not know of the trial and the crucifixion of Jesus. 'But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel.' The stranger asked (v.25) why they were so slow to believe all that the prophets had spoken adding: 'was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things, and enter into his glory?' (v.27) 'And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.' This story recounts what indeed must have happened with the disciples in general. Their Rabbi whom they believed to be the Messiah had been crucified. Their faith in him had been seriously shaken as a result. Until near the end, some of them, even James and John and Peter too had very imperfectly understood what kind of Messiah Jesus was. With His death they were stunned, but the strength of the personal relationship with Jesus stood the shock. They turned to the Scriptures to see whether they had overlooked any testimonies of the Messiah therein set forth. Luke ch. 24:33-53 tells how these two disciples rejoined the others in Jerusalem and told how they had recognized the stranger as the Risen Lord when He broke bread with them. The group knew that Jesus appeared to Simon, but when Jesus suddenly stood in the midst of the disciples, they thought they had seen a ghost. Jesus sought to allay their fears by asking them to feel His flesh and by asking for food. Then most significantly He says (v.44) 'These are my words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled'. (v.45) 'Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures (v.46) and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and on the third day rise from the Studia Post-Biblica

VIII

2

4

PROLEGOMENA

dead, (v.47) and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem!'" The last verse obviously dates from a time after the infant church recognized its duty to preach the Gospel to the uncircumcised as well as to the circumcised. We may therefore see these verses as setting out the experience of the early church in its thought about Jesus, His Mission and Message. But as with the Emmaus story here too the searching the Scriptures to place Jesus, must have begun soon after His death. It is quite possible that each Darshan or Maggid, i.e. Rabbinic Jewish preacher had his own collection of Messianic proof texts. The Meturgemans who translated the Law and the Prophets orally into Aramaic when they were read in Hebrew in the Synagogue, doubtless helped to make the general public aware of possible Messianic texts. The Targums though written down long after the first century, do preserve many Messianic allusions. Though the Mishnah, the Oral Law of the Elders codified by Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi about 200 A.D. has little on the Messiah, being as it is primarily a halakhic (or legal) work, the Talmud codified about 500 A.D. has in its haggadic portions numerous references to the Messiah and the fulfilment of Messianic hopes. However it is in the Haggadic Midrashim like Midrash Rabba or Pesikta Rabbati etc. that we get most references to the Messiah, and understandably so, for Messianic hopes belong to homiletics and preaching, not to halakhic or legal works. There are in Jewish sources many views of the Messiah to come, and many proof texts. One has only to turn to the Jewish Apocalyptic literature preserved in translations by the Christian Church and now in large measure reappearing in the original languages from the Qumran caves, to see the diversity of apocalyptic and eschatological schemes with or without a Messiah, and the different views as to the nature of the Messiah and of His antecedents. Most of the Old Testament was the Scriptures, certainly by the mid-second century B.C., and by that time at least a dogma of verbal inspiration of the Law was held. There might be discussions in the mid-first century A.D. about Ezekiel, and at the end of that century about Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs, but they were already in the Canon. To the people of that time, given the belief in the Hebrew Bible as literally the word of God, it followed that all that was prophesied in it must be fulfilled, as the word of God once spoken must be fulfilled, must be accomplished. It is worth bearing in mind that the books of the Bible that we call History were themselves called the Early Prophets in the Jewish

NOVUM TESTAMENTUM LATET IN VETERE

5

Canon. Whereas one could not alter the Bible or the Bible text, one was allowed a very considerable freedom in reading one's own views into it. Having a fixed Revelation in book form did not hamper the development of religion, it only led to the development of what may seem to us highly artificial exegesis. Among the Jews and later the Church Fathers the new views had to be related somehow to the abiding unchanging Word of God. It is therefore difficult, nay impossible without actual contemporary manuscript evidence to say categorically that only such and such verses in the Old Testament have a Messianic significance in the first century. Higher Criticism of the Old Testament does not, and cannot help us to understand the New Testament. Jesus and His disciples, like their Rabbinic Jewish and Dead Sea Sectarian contemporaries were not Higher Critics. Whereas it is of importance to understand as best we can what was the original significance of any statement in the Old Testament, we must remember the secondary meaning which in course of time through the experience of those who used the Scriptures in liturgical devotion, came to be given to any Biblical statement; though this latter might not be justified as conserving the original sense of the word, yet it has properly an historical value of its own. Biblical verses which were seen by some party or sect as having Messianic significance would be eschewed by another party sometimes for that very reason. We cannot say that the Rabbinic Jewish Midrashic and Haggadic literature contains all the texts that were ever regarded as Messianic, e.g. Deut. 18 :18, the Samaritan Messianic proof text par excellence, and also a Christian one, cf. Acts 3 :22; 7 :37 (and used too by Dead Sea Sectaries) is not a Messianic proof text in Rabbinic sources. But this activity of finding fulfilment for some Biblical word in what has happened, or to put it another way, to find reassurances that what has happened is in accordance with the revealed will of God as shown in some text of the Bible, is found in the Old Testament itself, e.g. I Kgs 2:27, 'So Solomon expelled Abiathar from being priest to the Lord, thus fulfilling the word of the Lord which he had spoken concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.' The word fulfilled is 1 Sam. 2 :31. Another example of fulfilment adduced in the Old Testament is II Chron. 36 :21 'To fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths. All the days that it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfil seventy years' The word fulfilled is in Jer. 25: 11 : 'This whole land shall become a ruin and a waste, and these

6

PROLEGOMENA

nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years.' There is therefore a precedent in the Hebrew Bible for the phrase so characteristic of Matthew's Gospel. 'That it might be fulfilled' followed by a quotation from the Old Testament. But the expression that the Scripture might be fulfilled is not unknown in John's Gospel. John 19 :28 asserts that Jes us knowing on the cross that all things were now accomplished said: 'I thirst' that the Scripture might be fulfilled. But one thinks also of John 12:38 'that the word spoken by Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled: "Lord, who has believed our report, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?"' (Isa. 53:1). This example is highly significant in that it shows how fulfilment was implied in the prophetic word. Or John 12 :39 'Therefore they could not believe. For Isaiah again said(v.40) "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they should see with their eyes and perceive with their heart, and turn for me to heal them." (v.41), "Isaiah said this because he saw his glory and spoke of him." The prophet had seen and declared the word, the fulfilment could be no other. If then one knew the prophetic word one knew the fulfilment better than any mere eyewitness. (John 12:14-16) Here John uses one of the very few testimonies which he has in common with the synoptics: (Zech. 9:9); (v.14) 'And Jesus found a young ass and sat upon it; as it was written(v.15) "Fear not, daughter of Zion; behold, your King is coming, sitting on an ass's colt!" V.16 is very significant in our investigation. 'His disciples did not understand this at first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that this had been written of him, and had been done to him.' This verse reminds us of Luke 24:26,27, and 24:44-46 and the study of the Scriptures undertaken by the Church after Jes us was gone from them. It is important to note the order. First comes their remembering that these things were written of Him and then only that they had done these things to Him. As Luke 24:46 makes the Risen Christ say, "Thus it is written that the risen Christ should suffer etc." Here in John 12: 16 we may see how the prophetic word shaped the record of the event. John 13: 18 is also of interest in this connection. Jes us at the Last Supper says 'I am not speaking of you all; I know whom I have chosen; it is that the scripture may be fulfilled, 'He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.' This is a quotation from Ps. 41 :10. In Matt. 26 :21 it reads 'and as they were eating he said, "Truly I say to you, one of you will betray me."' (Luke 22:21) 'But behold the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table.' It is obvious that there

NOVUM TESTAMENTUM LATET IN VETERE

7

is some relationship between the charge of treachery in all four gospels. In the Synoptics this is given as plain factual statement whereas in John it is that the Scripture be fulfilled. In John's account there is the apologetic note. Jesus knows whom He has chosen, no mistake has been made, but the Scripture typified by Ps. 41 :10 has to be fulfilled. However, one must leave the question unresolved as to whether the verse in the Psalm led to the filling in of the factual detail in accounts of the Last Supper or whether John's finding of a proof text was a mere work of supererogation. John 19 :23,24 tells how the soldiers when they had crucified Jes us took His garments and made four parts, one for each soldier, and also His tunic. 1 'But the tunic was without seam, woven from top to bottom; (v.24) so they said to one another, "Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be."' This was to fulfil the scripture, "They parted my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots." So the soldiers did this'. Mark 15:24 gives merely the factual statement: 'And they crucified him, and divided his garments among them, casting lots for them, to decide what each should take.' Luke 23:34. 'And Jesus said: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do". And they cast lots to divide his garments.' Again we have a purely factual statement. Further in v.35 we read: 'And the people stood by, watching'; Ps. 22:18b reads: 'They stare and gloat over me; (v.19) they divide my garments among them, and for my raiment they cast lots.' But neither Luke nor Mark draw attention to the unusually close relationship between the words of verse or verses of the Psalm and the details of their respective narratives. Matthew 27 :35 reads: 'And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots ;2 (that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet. 'They parted my garments among them, and upon my clothing did they cast lots'). Here later MSS make Matthew, following John 19:24, show concern that the parting of the garments mentioned in Ps. 22:19 be fulfilled. Unlike the Fourth Gospel it does not provide also for the fulfilling of the detail concerning the clothing. Not that there was need as in Ps. 22:19; 'garments' and 'clothing' are synonymous 3 and the double mention is only 1 2 3

xcd 'l'OV XL'l'wvr:x. retained by Nestle, but not by Westcott & Hort. Not in Nestle's text nor in Westcott & Hort. •il::i and •izr::il;i; LXX rd [µdrui µov and rov [µanaµ6v µov.

8

PROLEGOMENA

due to parallelism. But John's handling of the fulfilment of Ps. 22 :19 is more faithful to the fullblown midrashic method. Matthew and Mark are the only two of the Evangelists who supply the cry from the cross: 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?' which is the opening verse of Ps. 22 :2. One must be careful in using the evaluation of the midrashic method as a key to the development of Gospel stories. It is hard to see why Mark and Matthew put the cry of dereliction in Jesus' mouth unless He has said it. Granted He had repeated Ps. 22 :2, the rest of the details of the crucifixion could be modelled on points in the Psalms as fulfilment thereof. The Fourth Gospel while not giving the cry of dereliction uses here the word 'fulfilment' more than Matthew. It adds the piercing of His side as a factual detail in v.34, but in v.37 quotes Zech. 12:10: 'they shall look on him whom they have pierced.' The Fourth Gospel account of the crucifixion CJ ohn 19 :32,33 tells of the breaking of the legs of the two thieves. (v.33) 'But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.' In v.36 we are told 'For these things took place, that the scripture might be fulfilled, "Not a bone of him shall be broken"' (Ps. 34:21). We must admit that in verse 35 it is stated 'He who saw it has borne witness - his testimony is true, and he knows that he tells the truth - that you also may believe.' Whether we can accept this testimony of the eyewitness or not as affecting the details does not affect our general proposition, nor that of the writer of the Fourth Gospel (v. 36). 'For these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled.' A person could be an eyewitness and afterwards in studying the Bible to see where it testifies of Him, have recollection of details altered in the light of the testimonies. We must remember to give full weight to 'that the scripture might be fulfilled.' The Scriptures had to be fulfilled, were fulfilled. However the selection of the testimonies even out of a Psalm which found its fulfilment in the Crucifixion seems to vary, and in fact to be almost a personal matter. The Fourth Gospel account of the Crucifixion does not mention the cry of dereliction (Ps. 22 :2) which probably drew attention to the Psalm in the first place.

2. MARK'S GOSPEL AND THE OLD TESTAMENT Mark's Gospel after the title Mark 1 :1 'The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God' cites in verses 2&3, Mal. 3:1 & Isa. 40:3 with the bare introduction in verse 2 'as it is written in Isaiah the

MARK'S GOSPEL AND THE OLD TESTAMENT

9

prophet.' Then v.4 introduces John the Baptist. There is no 'the scripture being fulfilled' inserted, and yet the manifest intention of Mark in prefacing the appearance of John the Baptist with two scriptural verses is to show that the Scripture had been fulfilled. I should like to point out that in Matthew where we have eleven occurrences of 'that it might be fulfilled' (cf. A.V.) we have in addition 14 occurrences of 'as it is written' (cf. A.V.) It is incorrect to regard the eleven occurrences of 'that it might be fulfilled' as the only Testimonia in Matthew as T. W. Manson did in the Mission and Message of Jes us, pp. 313-314; a considerable number of the verses introduced with 'as it was written' are also testimonia. There was no difference between 'that it may be fulfilled' and 'as it is written' (when applied to something which had now come about). The fact that it was written in the Scriptures carried its fulfilment in it as a matter of course. Not all the occurrences of 'as it is written' apply to fulfilment of prophecy but may be merely adducing of the Scripture to show proper conduct, as for example Jesus in Matt 4:4 quoting Deut. 8 :3; but even here in a sense the word was finding its full fulfilment in them, and His words and message. In Mark's Gospel there are some 63 allusion references to the Old Testament, thirty six of which are virtually quotations, forty five of these are in the mouth of Jesus. While 'as it is written' as an introduction to a quotation from the Old Testament is unusual in this Gospel, it does occur once used by Jesus to introduce direct scriptural quotations. Mark 7 :6 'as it is written,' 'This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.' (Isa. 29 :13). In Mark 11 :17 Jesus puts it in the form of a question. "Is it not written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations?' (Isa. 56 :7), But you have made it a den of robbers" (]er. 7 :11). This combining of two separate verses from two separate prophets could be quite characteristic of the use the Marean Jesus makes of the Old Testament, as one can see in other sayings of His. (cf. Mark 13:27 drawn from Zech. 2:10; Deut. 30:4). In Mark 14:27 Jesus tells the disciples at the Last Supper "You will all fall away; for it is written, (Zech. 13 :7) 'I will strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered.'" In this Gospel quotations from the Old Testament can be introduced by Jesus saying "Have you not read ... ?" e.g. Mark 12:10 "And have you not read this scripture: (Ps. 118:22) 'The very stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner; this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'?" Significantly Matthew

10

PROLEGOMENA

in citing this utterance of Jesus does retain the reference to 'read', e.g. 'Have you never read in the scriptures etc.' (Matt. 21 :42). But not so Luke 20:17 "What then is this that is written: 'The very stone which the builders rejected, has become the head of the corner'?" (Ps. 118 :22) (omitting verse 23 given by Mark and retained by Matthew). The other reference is in Mark 12 :26 in referring to the Pentateuch for proof of the resurrection. "Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God said to him: 'I am the God of Abraham and the God oflsaac, and the God of Jacob'?" (Ex. 3 :6). In Matthew the reference to reading is kept: 'Have you not read what was said to you by God' (Matt. 22 :32) : and here follows the quotation of Ex. 3 :6. In Luke 20 :37 the direct quotation disappears: 'But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.' The allusion is left where in Mark there is a quotation. But in Mark itself we have allusions instead of quotations which are worth examining. e.g. Mark 2:25 'And he said to them, "Have you never read what David did, (I Sam. 21 :6) when he was in need, and was hungry, he and those who were with him: (v.26) how he entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?"' In Matt. 12 :3 the same Biblical reference is introduced "Have you not read what David did" etc. Also in Luke 6 :3 it is introduced by "Have you not read what David did" etc. Both Luke and Matthew omit the difficult reference to Abiathar. It would appear that there was a tradition that Jesus in His teaching sometimes referred to the Scriptures as a support just as we find the Jewish Rabbis doing. We will see when we turn to the Q. material that again like the Rabbis He could use the Mishnah form of teaching but with a difference, that He did not give the authority of a Rabbi for His remarks. At the beginning of Mark we have two quotations from the Old Testament, Mal. 3:1, and Isa. 40:3, serving as Testimonia regarding John the Baptist, in his character as forerunner of Jesus. John is immediately mentioned in verse 4, but already Jesus had been mentioned in v .1, and the brief Marean account of the Baptist's work and preaching serves only as a brief preamble of five verses (vv. 4-8), before Jesus appears on the scene. Even verses seven and eight as an example of John's preaching are designed to show how John fulfilled the prophecy

MARK'S GOSPEL AND THE OLD TESTAMENT

11

of'my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way; the voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight' Mark 1 :2 and 1 :3 (quotations from Mal. 3 :1 and Isa. 40:3) are therefore in the nature of prophetic testimonia not only to John the Baptist but Jesus. It is significant that both quotations occur in Matthew's Gospel though separated from one another. Jesus Himself applies Mal. 3 :1 to John cf. Matt. 11 :10. "This is he of whom it is written, 'Behold, I send My messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way before thee."' This is interesting a) as another example of Jesus Himself being credited with referring to Biblical prophecies as finding fulfilment in events relating to His ministry. b) it is interesting also that Luke's Gospel (Luke 7:27) like Matthew records Jesus as citing Mal. 3: 1 with reference to John the Baptist, introduced by 'This is he of whom it is written' and putting the quotation in a similar context - the occasion when the disciples of John came to him asking: "Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?" Luke 7: 18, cf. Matt. 11 :3. This section in Luke and Matthew is from Q. Mark 1 :3 "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight (Isa. 40 :3)" appears not only in Matt. 3:3, Luke 3:4, but also in John 1 :23. In Matthew's Gospel (Matt. 3:3) the writer introduces the verse: 'For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said.' John has already been referred to in Matt. 3: 1. Whereas he shows his character as forerunner in v .11 'but he who is coming after me is mightier than I etc.', John's teaching and mission on its own rights is afforded space. In Luke 3 :2 the Gospel writer states that 'the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.' In vv.4 & 5 (ibid.), Isa. 40:3-5 are quoted introduced by 'as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet.' The possibility cannot be excluded that in his preaching the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Luke 3 :3) he did not in fact cite these verses. Luke 3 :7-18 deals with the preaching of John. In v.15 we are told: 'As the people were in expectation, and all men questioned in their hearts concerning John, whether perhaps he were the Christ.' In answer to this (v.16) it was that he said: 'but he who is mightier than I is coming' etc. (cf. Mark 1 :7, 8). If this is so, Isa. 40 :3 was not part of the preaching of John, but enshrines the early Church's attitude to John and his significance. The Gospel of John does not quote Mal. 3:1 connecting John the Baptist with Elijah returned (cf. John 1 :21) 'and they asked him:

12

PROLEGOMENA

"What then? Are you Elijah?" He said, "I am not." (They, the priests and Levites from Jerusalem, asked him:) "Are you the prophet?" (Deut. 18:15, 18) (i.e. the prophet like Moses, or Moses returned). And he answered: "No."' 'The prophet like Moses' or 'the prophet' is tantamount to a Messianic claim, cf. Acts. 3 :22, 7 :37, and Discipline Manual, and the Samaritan Taheb belief based on Deut. 18:18. Already in v.20 he said he was not the Christ. In v.23 when finally driven to say who he was 'he said: "I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, 'Make straight the way of the Lord,' as the prophet Isaiah "said (Isa. 40 :3). The fact that all four Gospels quote Isa. 40 :3 with reference to John's ministry probably shows a general early evaluation of John which might be useful apologetically vis a vis followers of John the Baptist. It is possible that the dramatic tale in John 1 :19-27 as to who he is or the similar question in Luke 3: 15 is a cautionary Haggada built on the Isa. 40 :3, once it was decided by the apostles searching the Scriptures that this verse found fulfilment in John. Of course Mal. 3 :1 which features in Mark 1 :2 is applied in Matthew and Luke in Q by Jesus Himself to John; in His teaching the people (Luke 7 :24-28, Matt. 11 :7-15) about John, and Himself the Son of Man, John is the forerunner. In Matt. 11 :1Off having applied Mal. 3: 1 to John, He identifies him with Elijah returning and less clearly Himself with the Messiah as is seen in the verses which follow, cf. Matt. 11 :19ff. Luke 3 :6 cites Isa. 52: 10 'and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.' This is all the more significant as coming after vv.4 & 5 which quotes Isa. 40 :3-4.

3. Q AND THE OLD TESTAMENT Only 1'4 verses out of the approximately 257 verses in Q according to Manson's 1 reconstruction, have any reference to the words of the Old Testament Scriptures. One case however is of the fulfilment type, when Jesus (Luke 7:27) applies Mal. 3:1 to John. In two cases Jesus applies Scripture to Himself. Firstly in Luke 7 :22 He draws on Isa. 29:18-19; 35:5-6 and 61 :1, but His method is all the more strikingly guarded paraphrase compared with the accompanying identification of Mal. 3:1 with John. The other case, Luke 13:35, ending with a quotation of Ps. 118 :26 is not as it were underlined. In the Temptation narrative Luke 4:1-13 He quotes Scripture at Satan, but His quota1

The Mission and Message of Jesus, p. 307 ff.

Q AND THE OLD TESTAMENT

13

tions (Deut. 8 :3; 6 :13; 16 :16) were apposite in the mouth of an Israelite. The other direct quotation in Luke 13:27 (Ps. 6:9) is in a parable, and while He is the Master of the house, it could be understood of God, and would therefore be unobjectionable. The other allusions, when not to Biblical characters as in Luke 17 :27,29,32. (if 29 and 32 are allowed to Q) are much vaguer, more like mere passing hints. They are not mere literary allusions, nor chance resemblance of language. They are hints, but significant hints, as Luke 13:19 to Dan. 4:9,18, Luke 13:29 to Mal. 1:11, Isa. 59:19, Luke 13:35 to Jer. 22:5, 12:7. They are guarded references, which supply however, sufficient hints to His listeners as to the drift of His address. It may indeed be significant that they occur in proximity to one another. But the bulk of Q makes no reference to the Scripture in any way. This is significant and bears out Mark 1 :22 that He taught as one having authority and not as the scribes, who whether they were giving halakhic Midrashic or haggadic Midrashic teaching were accustomed to quote the Scripture as the asmakhta or support for their teaching. Not that they did this always. One would use the Mishnaic form and just state your halakhic proposition, e.g. 'The four 1 primary causes of injury are the ox and the pit and the crop-destroying beast, and the outbreak of fire' (M. Baba Qamma 1 :1). But there are singularly few examples of halakhoth by Tannain of the first century. Even the great schools of Beth Hillel and Beth Shammai 2 have only three hundred and sixteen recorded differences, though they were alleged by the end of the first century to be making the Torah, two Torahs, one of Beth Hillel and one of Beth Shammai. The Rabbi of the time unless he was an outstanding scholar of either of these schools would not dare to give a ruling in his own name without Biblical support, though he might repeat one such on the authority of his own Rabbi. 1 Ex. 21 :28-22 :6 is alluded to, implicitly but not explicitly. However in M. Baba Bathra 5 :1; 'If a man sold a ship, he has sold also the mast, the sail, the anchor & all the means for steering it; but he has not sold the slaves, the packing bags or ladings'. The connection with the Written Law is not apparent. 2 The only differences recorded between Hillel & Shammai themselves are mentioned in T. B. Shab. 15a; M. Hag. 2:2; M. Eduy. 1 :2,3; M. Nidd. 1 :1. Between Beth Hillel & Beth Shammai three hundred and sixteen controversies are recorded in the Talmud, only in 55 of which the Shammaites are more lenient. The Oral Law could hardly have been very extensive when it was said of their casuistic differences: 'The one Law has become two Laws.' Tos. Hag. 2 :9; T. B. Sanh. 88b; T. B. Sotah 47b.

14

PROLEGOMENA

R. Eliezer ben H yrcanus 1 refused to give any Mishnaic teaching on any point that he had not heard from his teacher Rabban Johanan b. Zakkai. Jesus was outside the union and He gave teaching in His own name. True on only a very few points is it halakhic 2 but even in haggadic matters, and most of Jes us' teaching is Haggada, though there was greater freedom one would be careful not to offend the vested interests. In any case in Haggadic Midrashim it' was a rule to cite Scripture if not as support for every detail in the parable or teaching, at least as its general basis, either beginning or ending with 'as it is written,' or 'said in so and so.' Indeed, the Bible was the starting point, though much of what gave substance even to the teaching was perhaps very vaguely connected with that particular text, just as in many modern sermons. Jes us, in His teaching in Q presupposes the Old Testament Bible but does not cite His text3 • This would be strange to the ordinary listener of His time, but probably refreshing as the thread of the teaching was not broken with 'as it is written in so and so' (only vaguely related to what was being said). But it probably smacked of minuth4 heresy to the Pharisees to have a preacher without a text. It seems that Q because it does not cite Scripture could well be reminiscences of the very teachings of Jesus as He gave it. Jesus as we have seen above, probably had His own proof texts, but may well not have wanted to flaunt them openly, because that would have shown to the authorities ecclesiastical and political or other informers, the tendenz of His teaching. After all there is Luke 13 :33 (not a Q verse): 'Nevertheless I must go on my way today and tomorrow and the day following; for it cannot be that a prophet perish away from Jerusalem.' He had successfully to accomplish His mission as Messiah and die in Jerusalem as Messiah as such, and not be waylaid and silenced in a hole and corner on some other charge. 1 cf. M. Negaim 9 :3,11 :7; Eliezer says 'I have no tradition about this.' His disciple Judah b. Bathyra said to him 'I will expound it.' Eliezer said 'If it be to confirm the words of the Sages, be it so.' In both cases he did so and Eliezer said 'You are a great Sage in that you have confirmed the words of a Sage.' Only for this purpose -namely the confirming of tradition -was speculative study permissible, 2 e.g. cf. Mark 10 :11,12, the prohibition of divorce, and of Mark 12 :17 in the question of the legality of paying tribute to Caesar. 3 That is not to say that there are no 0.T. allusions in Q as a whole or even quotations from the O.T. It is significant that out of 257 verses of Q there are only 14 having references at all to the words of the O.T. 4 Minuth. Heresy, but Judea-Christianity as heresy par excellence. cf. T. B. Sotah 49a, that on his deathbed Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi, editor of the Mishnah, c. 200 A.D. said 'Who will now defend our cause against the Minim who do not believe in the words of the wise, i.e. of the Rabbis.

JESUS IS FULFILLING THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY

15

4. JESUS HIMSELF ACCORDING TO MARK'S GOSPEL TEACHES THAT HE IS FULFILLING THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY In Mark 9:9 Jesus charges Peter, James and John as they came down from the Mount of Transfiguration not to tell anyone 'what they had seen, till the Son of man should have risen from the dead.' They, as v.10 informs us, did not understand what "the rising from the dead" should mean.' In v.11 we are told that they asked Jesus 'Why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come?' This implies that the scribes, if not Jesus stressed Mal. 3 :23 in a Messianic sense. In Matthew's Gospel we have two references to Mal. 3 :23 a) in the parallel to the Marean account Matt. 17 :10, where the disciples also refer to the scribes as saying that first Elijah must come: b) in Matt. 11 :13-15 Jesus said 'For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John; and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.' Jesus not only accepts the need for Elijah to come, but identifies John with Elijah. This Matthean account of Jesus' testimony to John the Baptist (Matt. 11 :7-19) is derived as Manson allows (The Mission and Message of Jesus, p. 477) mainly from Q; but vv. 14 and 15 having no parallel in Luke may come from the special Matthean source. Manson ibid. writes as follows: 'The fact is that the identification of John with Elijah is peculiarly at home in Matthew; and it may be conjectured that the identification was made by Jewish Christians who had to meet the objection from the Jewish side that the true Messiah would be anointed and proclaimed by the returned Elijah, that this had not happened in the case of Jesus and that therefore Jesus was not the true Messiah. The obvious way of countering this argument was to say that Elijah had indeed come and prepared the way for Jesus - in the person of the Baptist. That Jesus Himself anticipated and met the objection, or indeed that He cared very much about fulfilling the current Jewish Messianic expectations is most unlikely.' This last sentence we cannot accept in toto. Perhaps He did not care very much about fulfilling all current Messianic expectations, but where they agreed with His conception of the Messiah and were fairly based on Scripture as interpreted by Him, we can surely expect Him to care about fulfilling them. One would expect too that Jesus Himself declared His position vis-a-vis John; further while the present writer is prepared to allow that the Gospels represent early preaching of and about Jesus in the conscious-

16

PROLEGOMENA

ness of the Early Church as they studied the Scriptures, yet he is convinced that the basic lines on which they moved had been laid down by Jes us Himself. But to return to Mark ch. 9, in v.12 Jesus answered Peter's and James' and John's query 'And he said to them "Elijah does come first to restore all things; and how is it written of the Son of Man, that he should suffer many things and be treated with contempt? But I tell you, that Elijah has come, and they did to him whatever they pleased, as it is written of him."' Then intervenes the episode of the child possessed by a deaf and dumb spirit which the disciples could not cast out, but Jesus could: in answering their inquiry as to why they could not (v.29) 'He said to them, "this kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer."' Thereafter He departed and passed through Galilee 'And he would not have anyone know it, (v.31) for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, "The Son of man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him; and when he is killed, after three days he will rise." ' But this is not the first time that Jesus had taught them of the suffering of the Son of Man. Going (Mark 8 :27) into the towns of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples 'Who do men say that I am?' And they answered: (v.28) "John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; and others one of the prophets." On His asking (v.29) "But who do you say that I am?" Peter said, "You are the Christ." Jesus charged them (v.30) to tell no one about Him. However He proceeds to teach them (v.31) 'that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days shall again.' And v.32 'He said this plainly,' much to the annoyance of Peter. Mark 10:32-34 comes back to the same theme as they were on the way to Jerusalem. (v.33) "Behold,'' says Jesus, "we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and deliver him to the Gentiles; (v.34) And they will mock him, and spit upon him, and scourge him, and kill him, and the third day he will rise." This time it was James and John who failed to understand. In Mark 14:21 at the Last Supper after indicating (v.20) that one of the twelve should betray Him, Jesus says "For the Son of man goes as it is written qf him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! I twouldhave been better for that man,ifhe had not been born.'

JESUS IS FULFILLING THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY

17

We note that in Matt. 26:24 the parallel passage in that Gospel, this verse is cited in identical words, and has therefore the significant statement, "The Son of man goes, as it is written of him." In Luke 22 :22 the Lucan parallel reads "For the Son of man goes as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed." It would then appear that in Mark Jesus is represented as teaching His disciples of His sufferings that were to come. We find five clear instances of this in Mark 8:31, Mark 9:12, Mark 9:31, Mark 10:33 and finally Mark 14:21. It is indeed eminently possible that Jesus did realise the outcome of His Mission and did instruct the disciples as to what He saw was the purpose and meaning of His death, and that the Kerugma is not all due to the clearer insight or hindsight of the early Church guided by His spirit. But in these verses cited above, He is doing something much more direct: He is presaging His fate. In Mark 8:31 and Mark 10:32-34 He is more specific than in Mark 9:12, or even Mark 9 :31, as to the actual agents of His end, though in Mark 14:21 the saying 'the Son of man is betrayed' in its present setting is pointed at the individual betrayer. While we cannot rule out the filling in of details as in Mark 10 :34 as to the mocking, scourging and spitting, the announcement of impending death at the hands of the authorities mentioned in Mark 8:31 and Mark 10:34 would be clear enough as they represented the authorities whose opposition He was arousing. What is more interesting to our investigation is that in Mark 9: 12 Jesus claims that certain things are written of the Son of Man to wit a) that He must suffer many things, b) be treated with contempt; He claims too that what happened to Elijah, (John?), had been written of him (v.13) 1 • Mark 14:21 makes Jesus again refer to the Son of Man going as it is written of Him. What these things are that were written of the Son of Man is not clear. It is not even made clear that they written in the Scriptures. The possibility is indeed that Jesus is referring to the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms when He says: 'as it is written' but one cannot rule out of account what are now known as Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha because the Canon was still somewhat elastic2 • Mark's Gospel does give examples of Jesus Himself quoting the Scripture 'as it is written.' Mark 7:6 Jesus says 'Well did Isaiah But cf. Detached Note G.p.A. Even if the Synod of Yabneh at the end of the first century A.D. did fix the Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures (but see detailed note on the Canon), Ben Sira is cited in T.B. Baba Bathra 92b in the 4th. century as Hagiographa. 1

2

18

PROLEGOMENA

prophesy of you hypocrites, (Isa. 29 :13), as it is written, "This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.'" Also Mark 11 :17. "Is it not written (Isa. 56 :7) 'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations?' But you have made it a den of robbers (Jer. 7:11).'' Also Mark 14:27, "for it is written, 'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered (Zech. 13 :7),'" cited as Jesus went towards the Mount of Olives after the Last Supper. Jesus according to Mark 14 :48-49, answered the captors in the Garden: "Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs to capture me? (v.49) Day after day I was in the temple with you teaching, and you did not seize me. But let the scriptures be fulfilled." - By whom? By them or by Jesus? Did He see Himself as having fulfilled the Scripture which He saw as applying to Him? There is a note of verisimilitude about the remark; but if this had been written in by the Gospel writer himself or his source of tradition, the alleged passage in question would surely have been given. Jes us in Mark 12: 10 asks after the parable of the vineyard and the wicked husbandmen that killed the heir: 'Have you not read this scripture: (Ps.118:22-23). "The very stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner, this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes"?' 'They' (presumably the scribes and chief priests, (cf. Mark 12:12) sought to lay hold on Him, but feared the people. The use of the introductory phrase 'Have you not read' or 'have you never read' occurs too on the lips of Jesus in Mark 12 :26 in proving the resurrection from Ex. 3 :6, and in Mark 2 :25 in citing David and the bread of the Presence in justifying the disciples' plucking of the corn on the Sabbath. While only two of the references to Scripture made by Jesus in Mark, yet they (Mark 12:26, & 14:27) are the most significant, in that Mark unlike Matthew does not himself quote Scripture to show its fulfilment in Jesus. Of this we shall have more to say. Suffice it to say now that though Jesus only quotes Scripture twice with implied reference to Himself, yet we have those other references by Jesus to the Scripture's testimony to Himself the Son of Man. Why does Mark himself not refer more to Scripture as being fulfilled in or as bearing witness to Jes us? And why does Jes us not specify what Scriptures to which in an omnibus way He alludes, testify to the Son of Man? That testify they did He seems to hold, and

JESUS IS FULFILLING THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY

19

presumably expounded or at least indicated the passage to His disciples? These questions take us to the heart of the matter. One could say that Matthew stuck on the 'as it is written,' 'that it might be fulfilled', as a sort of embellishment of his version of the Marean narrative, that they were late, that Jes us did not care for these things and that it represents the missionary activity of the Church. But this was no new thing, the pre-Christian Jews and the Jews who were the first Christians knew their Bible at least as well or perhaps better than the early Church. Jes us was not a Higher Critic. His view of the Bible was similar to that of the Rabbis and Darshanim of His time. On the one hand New Testament scholars tend to make Him less than the learned of His time as if ignorant of their method of exegesis, on the other hand as not interested. They succeed in making Him a misfit in His own time and a misfit in this. He seems a somewhat dazed do-gooder lost in Palestine with no positive programme, and no concrete aim in view, who stumbled on the crucifixion and whose disciples or disciples of disciples thought they knew more about the significance of Jesus than He did and constructed the Gospel as well as the Gospels. This is the Kenotic Theory with a vengeance, if there was a second Person to empty himself thus; rather it is the Christian myth demythologised and brought to earth. It is sometimes suggested that the Gospel of Mark did not make use of Testimonies like the Gospel of Matthew, because it is alleged that it was written for Gentiles. This statement one finds hard to believe in its entirety. Mark's Gospel does not absolutely exclude or dispense with such, e.g. Mark 14:49, in the mouth of Jesus Himself. We do not stress Mark 15 :28, the statement supposedly by the Gospel writer 'And the scripture was fulfilled: And he was numbered with the transgressors' (Isa. 53 :12), as it is not testified by the Uncials, yet it was known to the Caesarean texts and the Syriac Peshitta. The crucifixion narrative also is significant in another way just because it does not claim fulfilment of details of Ps. 22, the words of which occur in the account, but without acknowledgement, as we have pointed out earlier. The early Christian who knew the Marean account of the crucifixion and who heard the twenty second psalm recited or sung in worship, would be able to say that this Psalm is about Jesus. Mark presupposes the Testimonia and either a) represents a stage in the tradition when the scaffolding of 'that it might be fulfilled,' 'as it is written' is mainly dismantled, orb) belongs to an early period when the Jewish Christians being well versed in the Scriptures did not need BOWMAN -

The Gospel of Mark

3

20

PROLEGOMENA

the Old Testament prophecies fulfilled, to be pointed out; in any case, the Midrash built by these Testimonia and scriptural citations stands on its own, as independent facts. Why some Testimonia and scriptural citations remain at all is a problem which could be investigated. Mark retains most of the examples of scriptural citations as 'it is written' etc. in the statements by Jesus. This may explain their retention in such cases. Nevertheless this does not apply throughout the Gospel. From Mark 9:48 to 13:26 there are a considerable number of Biblical quotations among the words of Jesus which appear as if His own word 1 • Mark 13 in particular is almost catena of Biblical phrases: in vv. 7, 14,19,26, Daniel is drawn on without acknowledgement, as Isaiah in vv. 8,24,25, or Micah in v.12 and Zechariah in v.27, not to mention Deuteronomy in vv.22 and 27. The identification in Mark 13 :14 of the 'abomination of desolation' (A.V.) as 'spoken of by Daniel the prophet,' is textually late. 1

cf. also Mark 4:12.

CHAPTER TWO

PETER AND MARK'S GOSPEL If Mark 13, with its frequent allusion to Old Testament eschatology, were delivered by Jesus He would not need to underline for a Jewish audience well versed in the Scriptures that such and such a statement is to be found in such and such a book. Though we must admit it is usual in Midrashim to introduce quotations with 'as it is said.' On the other hand He may not always have wanted to underline the quotation or source reference of the phrase; a hint may have been enough for both friends and foes. Did Jes us then alter His practice with relation to quoting from the Scriptures according to the subject He was discussing? On some points He directs His hearers' attention to the verse in question, whereas in others He but hints. This would fit in with the impression which the Gospel gives that He had throughout His ministry at least two types of instruction: a) that for the multitude and b) that for the disciples, not differing in essential matters but in form. We must not underrate the Bible knowledge of His hearers either among the learned or among the so-called ignorant. These last 'the people that know not the Law,' the Sinners (who kept not the Law as elaborated by the Scribes) were not like the bulk of the laity of the present day. While they did not know i.e. recognise, the claims of the Law upon them as developed by the Rabbinic authorities, they knew their Bible in an intellectual sense, thanks to the work of the Rabbis in making the Law the inheritance of Jacob, and thanks to the fact that matters of the Law were matters of controversy, opposed as the bulk of the people were to Rabbinic demands. Could it be then that Jesus did have His own collection of Testimonia which He identified with Himself, the Son of Man, and which He refers to as written of the Son of Man? But what were they? Are they recoverable? Is Mark basing his Gospel on Peter's post eventum rationalisation of the Lord's life and death based on verses that Peter found out in searching the Scriptures? Or is he basing his Gospel on Peter's views without reference to the Scriptures, and any scriptural allusions are his (Mark's) own. Peter was a Jew, but Jesus was also

22

PROLEGOMENA

a Jew; if Peter could have referred to Old Testament support, Jesus could too. It may however be that while allowing that Peter retained some of the Biblical asmakhtoth or supports used by Jesus in His teaching, he, Peter, introduced others in setting out the events of Jesus' life. Ps. 22 and the Crucifixion would be a case in point, whereas Biblical allusions applied to John the Baptist could go back to Jesus. Eusebius: Ecclesiastical History, Bk. iii, 39, cites from 'The Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord,' by Papias, of the first half of the second century A.D.: 'And the elder (the Presbyter John) used to say this - Mark having become Peter's interpreter wrote down accurately so far as he remembered what Christ either said or did: not, however, in order, for he neither heard the Lord, nor followed Him, but subsequently as I have said followed Peter, who used to suit his instructions to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord's discourses (Logia) so that Mark made no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing - not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.' Justin Martyr in the mid-second century refers to Mark's Gospel as the Memoirs of Peter. (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew, ch. 106.) Irenaeus states in the second half of the same century: 'This man (Mark) was the translator of Peter after the death of Peter himself. He also wrote this Gospel in the regions of Italy.' (Anti-Marcionite Prologue to Mark cited by Major in the Mission and Message of Jesus. Major, Manson and Wright, p. 4) which compares ibid. further subapostolic and Patristic references to Mark's Gospel). The unanimous testimony of the early writers is that Mark's Gospel is virtually the Petrine Gospel, cf. Tertullian against Marcion IV 5 'And what Mark published may be said to be Peter's whose interpretor Mark was.' Papias does say that what Mark set down was what Peter remembered Jesus saying or doing. 'Said' or 'did' both are important. Papias immediately qualifies this with regard to order presumably of both sayings and acts, by saying that he set them down 'not in order' or not in orderly fashion. Papias stresses that Mark neither heard nor followed the Lord, but only later on, Peter. He makes it clear that Mark wrote down accurately without omission what he remembered Peter saying. It is highly significant that Papias says that Peter 'used to suit his instruction to the needs of his hearers' and even more significant that he adds that Peter had

PETER AND MARK'S GOSPEL

23

no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord's discourses. Even if we take Papias' statement as itself an absolutely accurate account of what John the Presbyter said, and that the latter is himself giving an unbiased account of Mark's work and Peter's method, certain points remain obscure, particularly 'a connected account of the Lord's discourses (Logia).' Do the Logia only refer to His sayings by word and not by act? Are we to take it that while the order of the teaching was not that which Jesus gave it, it was the order in which Peter gave it to his catechumens? Are we to take then the order of events in Mark as historical, or are we to take them as Peter's order? It is most likely that Peter gave some sort of order to the events of the Ministry in his instruction of catechumens; on the other hand that order might not actually correspond to the actual order of events, but be rather an idealistic and artistic re-arrangement and selection of the events. It is clear that Mark's order though utilised by Matthew and Luke has not been accepted in toto by either\ or that all the events let alone the teaching therein been incorporated in Matthew and Luke 2 • 1 cf. Vincent Taylor 'The Gospels,' London, 1952 2: p. 44, who following A. E. J. Rawlinson 'The Gospel According to St. Mark,' p. xxxv and Streeter, 'The Four Gospels' p. 160, says 'there are parallels to all but about 60 of Mark's 661 verses in Matthew, and to about half of these verses in Luke, while the verbal agreement amounts in Matthew to 51 per cent, and in Luke to 53 per cent.' 2 Events in Matthew only, e.g. the coming of the Magi: (Matt. 2:1-12;), the slaughter of the innocents (Matt. 2:16-18), the flight into and return from Egypt (Matt. 2:13-14), (19-23); the finding of the coin in the fish's mouth (Matt. 17 :2427); St. Peter walking on the water (Matt. 14 :28-31); the betrayal of Jes us by Judas for thirty pieces of silver (Matt. 26 :15) Judas' remorse and suicide (Matt. 27 :3-10); the watch at the sepulchre (Matt. 27 :64-66); the bribing of the soldiers (Matt. 28:11-13); the resurrected dead walking about (Matt. 27:52,53). Regarding teaching peculiar to Matthew, there is e.g. the parables of the hidden treasure (Matt. 13 :44); the goodly pearl (Matt. 13 :45); the fish net (Matt. 13 :47); the unmerciful servant (Matt. 18 :23-35); the labourers in the vineyard(Matt. 20 :1-16); the two sons (Matt. 21 :28-32); the marriage of the king's son (Matt. 22:1-14); the ten virgins (Matt. 25 :1-13); the talents (Matt. 25 :14-30). More than one third of Matthew is peculiar to it alone. In Luke, slightly more than half the Lucan material is peculiar to Luke. Of the twenty miracles in Luke only twelve of them are in Mark, and six others are only in Luke, i.e. the miraculous draught of fishes (Luke 5 :1-11); the raising of the widow's son (Luke 7 :11-17); the healing of the woman with the spirit of infirmity (Luke 13 :10-17); the healing of the man with dropsy (Luke 14 :1-6); the cleansing of the ten lepers (Luke 17 :11-19); the healing of Malchus' ear (Luke 22 :49-51). There are thirty five parables in Luke, eight only of which are in Mark, and nineteen are peculiar to Luke's Gospel. In the incidents peculiar to Luke's Gospel are the promise of the birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1 :5-25); the Annunciation to Mary (Luke 1 :26-38); Mary's visit to Elizabeth, and the farmer's declaiming the Magnificat (Luke 1 :39-56); the census, the going of Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem, the Angels appearance to the shepherds and their

24

PROLEGOMENA

On the other hand both Matthew and Luke add events not to mention teaching not in Mark. The Synoptic Critics pin too much faith to the order given in Mark as representing with various reservations the actual historical order of events. But the Form Criticism school perhaps do not allow enough weight to the possibility that there was an order in Peter's teaching which is represented in Mark. The school which, influenced by Bishop Carrington's work, sees the arrangement of individual gospels based on the liturgical needs of the nascent Church probably read back the conditions of the midsecond century when such a need would be more clamant. And yet it is striking that the Gospels for the various Sundays do agree in the Pseudo-Jerome Canon with the paragraphing of Vaticanus. But the eventual paragraphing would be on the sense of what is written in the original work, and the selection of appropriate Gospels from such paragraphs according as they were felt suitable for the season of the year. One cannot argue on the basis of Stephanus' division of verses in the Gospels that Mark meant them to be divided thus and composed his work accordingly. Supposing we have the events in the Gospel in the way Peter set them out, what did he intend to convey to his hearers. Or if this is asking too much what did Mark intend to convey to those who used his Gospel? One hesitates to ask the question regarding those who read his Gospel, because one must not think of private silent reading of the Gospel by some individual as being the norm in the first century. It would be read out in Church assemblies or in the Synagogues of the early Christians, which is saying the same thing, for Synagogue means only assembly and not necessarily assembly place nor a spevisit to the young child Jesus (Luke 2:1-20); the circumcision of Jesus (Luke 2 :21); the purification and presentation and Simon's declaiming the Nunc Dimittis on taking Jesus in his arms (Luke 2 :22-39); the mention of the growth of Jesus (Luke 2:40) and His being with the Rabbis in the Temple (Luke 2:41-50]. Among other incidents peculiar to Luke are: the anointing of Jesus in Simon the Pharisee's house by the Sinner (Luke 7 :36-50) the women who ministered to Jesus (Luke 8 :1-3); the inhospitable Samaritans (Luke 9 :51-56); the Mission of the Seventy (Luke 10 :1-20); the story of Martha and Mary (Luke 10 :38-42); Pilate's massacre of the Galileans and the falling of the tower of Siloam (Luke 13 :1-5); the conversion of Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1-10); Jesus' weeping over Jerusalem (Luke 19: 41-44); the bloody sweat and the strengthening angel (Luke 22 :43,44); Jesus before Herod Antipas, the women of Jerusalem who bewailed Jesus (Luke 23: 27-31); eclipse of the sun prior to Jesus' death (Luke 23 :45); the appearance of Jesus on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35); the appearance to the disciples in Jerusalem and eating withthem(Luke 24:36-49) ;the Ascension (Luke 24: 50-53).

PETER AND MARK'S GOSPEL

25

cifically Jewish assembly. Actually there was provision in Jewish Synagogue worship for Midrashim to be read after the regular service1• In fact it is just such that Justinian in 527 prevented, and the Jews of that time circumvented the prevention by introducing the Piyyutim. These Piyyutim were liturgical compositions with Midrashic and Scriptural allusions worked into them which to be appreciated required knowledge of Bible and Midrash. The liturgical form of the Piyyut continued long after Justinian's time, indeed into the Middle Ages, so popular they became, the outpouring of the best in Hebrew poetry dedicated to God; popular too because of the fact that they with their recondite and subtle allusions put their hearers on their mettle. The Piyyut idea goes back long before Justinian and the spirit which motivated them is enshrined in the Talmudic saying that one must ever at worship offer some new and beautiful prayer to God. There was a liturgical tradition among the first Christians which they inherited from the old Jewish Church whether in Palestine or in the synagogues of the Diaspora. If Mark's Gospel were liturgical, it might not stress the Old Testament verses fulfilled. We must not think of Peter as the ignorant fisherman giving his testimony at the street corner. He was not ignorant though he had been an Am ha-aretz and observed not the rabbinic Oral Law, but it is morelikelythat he was a talmidhakhamim, a student of the wise. The Rabbis from the time of the beginning of the Pharisaic movement in the mid-second century B.C. had made the Law the possession of all Israel and laymen could be scholars. One has but to look at the pages of the Mishnah and Talmud to read of great Rabbis like Joshua ha-Sandlar, who as this name shows was a sandalmaker, as well as a scholar. Joshua b. Hananiah, a leading Tanna at the end of the first century was a needle-maker. Paul (Acts 18 :3) himself was a tentmaker; Pirke A both, 'the Sayings of the Fathers' (2 :2) advises on studying not only the Law, but the Law and a trade. Maimonides in Hilkhoth Talmud Torah, (i.e. on the Laws regarding Study of the Law) writing in the early Middle Ages reiterates this very point. Only one third of one's day according to Maimonides should be spent in gainful employment. (See Detached Note C). Maimonides also deals with behaviour of a student towards his master. The student must be willing to do for his master the most menial tasks. There was more in the title Rabbi than purely an hono1

cf. P. E. Kahle, 'The Cairo Genizah', p. 41 ff. Blackwell, Oxford.

26

PROLEGOMENA

rific term only. Maimonides draws on early material and merely groups it together from scattered Rabbinic references. The student could not teach in the presence of his Rabbi, nor later when he was ordained himself could he repeat the teaching of the Rabbi without citing the Rabbi's authority. Jesus is called Rabbi even by the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospels: John 1 :38,49; 3 :2,26; 4:31; 6 :23; 9 :2; 11 :8; Mark 9:5; 11:21; 14:45; Matt. 26:25,49; and undoubtedly as far as His disciples were concerned He was their Rabbi. We might add that His disciples belonged to His Haburah, or club, such as the Pharisaic Haburah, though the Pharisaic Haburah did not entail living together, but only the fulfilment of, certain tests as to fidelity in tithing and observances of rules of ritual purity. The Dead Sea Sect and the Essenes had a Haburah, but certainly in the case of the Dead Sea Sect it was virtually a Monastic Order on the basis of the Samaritan Nazarites1, though this latter was only for one year periods usually. The Essenes may have had groups of members scattered throughout Palestine rather like Tertiaries of St. Francis and working from local houses of the Hashaim, if indeed the Hasha'Im are rightly identified with the Essenes. But even with Rabbinic Judaism the 18th. century Zaddik of the Hasid'Im with his devoted disciples may represent an old line of development in Judaism - the pious preacher and miracle worker whose disciples while believing that God is in every man felt that in a special way God is in their Zaddik. In some ways it might be agreed that the prophets and the sons of the prophets (their disciples) never died out in ancient Israel, but that the Darshan and the Maggid and later the Zaddik were their successors. Maimonides (ibid) cites very definite rules as to how the Talmid Hakham, (a title which through modesty could be applied by Rabbis to themselves) should act in interpreting for his Rabbi. He is not thinking of the Meturgeman in the Synagogue translating Holy Writ into Aramaic as it is read out by the Baal Qore or Reader. He is thinking of a Talmid Hakham acting as his master's mouthpiece, or translating into the vernacular the teaching of his master while his masteris there and proclaiming it clearly to those assembled. The Talmid Hakham dare not deviate from his master's sense. After dealing with this it is that Maimonides goes on to treat of how a young Rabbi must always give his master's teaching under the authority of the master's name. Major in the Mission and Message of Jesus, p. 12 says of Mark's 1 cf. J. Bowman, 'The Importance of Samaritan Researches'. The Annual of the Leeds University Oriental Society, vol. 1, pp. 46, 47, Brill, Leiden, 1959.

PETER AND MARK'S GOSPEL

27

Gospel 'If we were, in modern fashion to describe the book on its title page, it would be 'My Year with the Lord Jesus.' The reminiscences of Peter, His Chief Apostle, reported and translated by His Dragoman, John Mark, for The Christians in Rome. Major is indeed rightin seeing Mark as Peter's Dragoman, but did not see (cf. ibid. p. 8), the full implication of this, such as we have adduced above as being required by a young scholar in reporting his master's words. Clement (cited in H.E. VII 25) points out that the Second Gospel is by Mark who composed it according to the instruction of Peter, who in his Catholic Epistles acknowledges him as a son. Peter was a Jew and a Jewish-Christian Rabbi, and in the Rabbinic tradition as a Rabbi would regard Mark his pupil as a son. Clement also (cf. H.E. VI. 14) states that he had followed Peter for a long time and remembered his sayings, and that those who had heard Peter preach at Rome asked Mark to write them out. The Gospel was his reply to their request. Clement says Peter when he learned of this (note he is according to this still alive) neither directly forbade nor encouraged it at the time of the Gospel's composition. If Mark were to Peter as a Talmid (disciple) is to his Rabbi, he is not likely to have written out Peter's preaching of Christ and His Gospel, while Peter his Rabbi was still alive. That Mark does not cite the name of Peter as his Rabbi is rather because here the Rabbinic Jewish practice of giving the name of one's Rabbi is insufficient for the case involved. Jesus was Peter's Rabbi and He was Mark's Master too. Peter would give his version of his Master's Mission and Message incorporating the words and acts of Jesus as he remembered them, but it was not as it were Peter who gave authority for the Gospel; it was somebody bigger than Peter: Jesus Himself. And so Peter needed not to be mentioned. A parallel to this in Rabbinic tradition would be the Halakhoth le Mosheh mi-Sinai, (the Halakhic teachings of Moses from Sinai) which though not Mosaic, were felt to go back before the Tannaim, and would seem in quite a number of cases to have general acceptance even among Jewish sects 1• Moses' authority, and no intermediate Rabbi's authority in handing on the tradition concerned, is involved. 1 One must proceed with great caution in attempting to date the Halakhoth le-Mosheh mi-Sinai. The majority of the teachings to which the formula is applied deal with phylacteries, Mezuzoth and the preparation and writing of MSS. Cf. P.T.Meg. 71d where some twenty rules are given as Halakhah from Moses from Sinai on the writing of Bible MSS. Bacher, Tradition and Tradenten p. 41 was of the opinion that the Amoraim tended to apply this designation rather promiscuously to Halakhoth for which Tannaim had not made this claim. Still the possi-

28

PROLEGOMENA

That Peter in the Gospel cuts sometimes a sorry picture, and his words were inept, all adds to the verisimilitude of the tradition that he is behind the Gospel of St. Mark. But what was Peter attempting in the Gospel? Whenever or for how long the Ministry lasted it ended at the Passover Season; whereas all four Gospels ended at the Passover Season, this is all the more true of Mark's Gospel, since most of ch. 16 may not belong to it. We must admit that Mark includes the Resurrection on the third day, which either is the Sabbath of the Omer agreeing with Paul's (1 Car. 15 :20) statement about Jesus being the first fruits of them that slept, or more strictly following Mark's chronology is the second day of the counting of the Omer. But while the Resurrection falls within the Sephirath, or counting of the Omer leading up to Pentecost, yet Passover lasts for seven days and even the Resurrection takes place within the Passover period. Whether we can say that the Resurrection is related typologically with the crossing 2 of the sea which would take place on the third day after Passover should be considered, for baptism with Paul is related typologically with baptism in the sea and the death of Jesus. (cf. Detached Note I) Papias spoke of Peter's preaching and Mark as setting down what he remembered of such preaching in the Gospel. We have one such example of Peter's preaching in Acts. ch. 10:34-43, but it would be going too far to say that the Gospel of Mark is just an expansion of such a sermon; however there are some points in it which already do show the outlines of the Gospel. The Gospel, (the word which God sent), 'the preaching good news of peace by Jesus Christ,' was proclaimed throughout all Judea and began from Galilee after the baptism which John preached. God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, i.e. made Him Messiah. Jesus went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. Peter declares "we are witnesses to all things bility remains, cf. Bacher, op. cit. that the assertion of the Sinaitic Revelation of the entire Oral Law in all its ramifications was a later extension and development, the basis for which was found in these single Halakhoth ascribed to Moses from Sinai, i.e. of immemorial antiquity. Could we here be dealing with ancient priestly Halakhoth dating back before the rise of the Pharisees in the mid-second century B.C.? The present writer while at the University of Leeds prior to 1959 was shown pieces of a head Tefillah from Qumran 4 which was divided into 4 compartments as is laid down in one of the Halakhoth le-Mosheh mi-Sinai dealing with Tefillin. The rules relating to preparation of skins for writing out the Scriptures, and the method of writing thereon might have been known to the Qumran Sectaries too. 2 cf. 'Biblical Calendars,' J. van Goudoever, Brill, Leiden, 1959.

PETER AND MARK'S GOSPEL

29

that he did both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree." (v.40) Peter declares God raised Him up on the third day. The Resurrection appearances were not to all the people, but to God's chosen witnesses, in fact himself and the other disciples who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead. (v.42) Jesus commanded Peter and the others to preach to the people and testify that Jes us is ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead. Peter ends his sermon by declaring that all the prophets of the Old Testament bear witness 'that every one who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.' Peter in his sermon in the house of Cornelius is speaking to Romans, and this doubtless is responsible for his opening (v.34): 'And Peter opened his mouth and said "Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality, (v.35) but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him."' Jesus preaches peace, yet He is the Messiah, (v.38) baptised in that office by the Holy Ghost. A major part of His ministry of healing is dealing with those under the dominion of the Devil. Peter witnessed it all and testifies to His death at Jerusalem and to His Resurrection. There is a unity in Peter's preaching which consists not just in that he, Peter, was eyewitness, but rather in the overriding emphasis on the Godgiven power of Jesus over evil in all its manifestations. That is God's way of preaching peace by Jesus Christ. Peace is not merely absence of war, but wholeness, restitution, wellbeing. Word and act are related. Dabar in Hebrew is a thing, and Ma'aseh, deed is also a story. Prophecy could be acted- witness Jeremiah and the pilcher (]er. 19:1,10), Hananiah and the yoke (28: 10) - . The symbolic action carried its fulfilment. But so did the word of the prophet. It had to be fulfilled in act. When St. Francis and the young brother went out to preach, and St. Francis merely walked in silence in the town and did not preach, the young brother at the end of the walk learned that conduct is preaching. But it is not in this passive sense that act and word are related in Semitic thought. The word or act is done not merely as a part of everyday life but as a sign, a portent. At the end of each book of the Law is the Massora telling the number of paragraphs, words, letters therein; and from the number of each we are told, 'and this is the sign', a Biblical verse whose first letters agree with the numbers (also letters of the alphabet in Hebrew). The connection between the two may seem to us quite as unrelated as the interplay between word and act, but to the old compiler of the

30

PROLEGOMENA

Massora there was a necessary connection. A scholar could not believe that I Enoch was a book that influenced Jesus, and said he· would as much believe that he had been influenced by old Moore's Almanac. But Jesus the Messiah had to use the thought forms of His time, to be understood. He used them selectively. His emphasis was different, also He gave them new content. We may rationalise the Gospel but it will not be the full Gospel as preached by Peter. But Peter here does not expound the full scheme of the word of peace as played out in Jesus' life. Again we must turn to the Gospel. But before doing so we note that according to Peter the Ministry is not saying good words, but doing good and healing those oppressed of the Devil. To take the first point - 'doing good'· Good in the Old Testament has a very solid materialistic quality. Goodness, or prosperity, or wholeness (Shalom, Peace) are interrelated. In the Old Testament God's world is one world, material and spiritual, or material and moral are interrelated. The prophets proclaim evil (evil events) as corning on Israel because of her evil deeds. The two ways of Deuteronomy, cf. Deut. 30:15,16, so important for later Jewish thought, make it clear that evil and disaster follow evil conduct and apostasy. On the other hand, good and prosperity follow the choice of the good path and loyalty to God and His Commandments. The Judaism of the New Testament times with its stress on Halakhah, rules of conduct and religious observance in particular, was influenced by this Deuteronomic picture of the two paths. Halakhah is the good path after God's Law. It was the public acknowledgement in daily life of God's demands. It was declaring that one was on the Lord's side. But was the Rabbinic view of what constituted the Halakhah, the good path, the only way, and in any case was it adequate? We must return to this later. Suffice it to say that the criticisms in the Gospels and in particular Mark 7 or Matthew 23 show that Jesus and/or the early Christians did not think so. In fact the multiplication of Jewish sects and parties in the first century, pre- 70 A.D. probably points to disagreement on whether the Rabbinic solution was adequate. The Rabbinic solution of erecting a hedge about the Law, cf. M. Aboth, 3:14, to make certain that the Law was kept, was an honest attempt to make the Law coterminous with life, and relevant to life; but Am ha-Aretz were put off by the minutiae of the Law and its excessive demands (or so it would seem to them). The Concept of the Oral Law as equally authoritative to the Written Law heightened the powersoftheRabbis,andtheyindeeddidsitinMoses'seatasLawgivers.

CHAPTER THREE

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGGADAH The Sadducees and the Samaritans kept the written Law and left it at that. They of course left open the possibility which the Rabbis did guard against, their people temporising with the world in matters not legislated for in the written Law. There was a need for a new spirit towards life, but that could not be acquired until there was a new attitude to God. The Rabbis and Jesus were agreed that one must take on oneself the Yoke of Heaven before one takes oneself the Yoke of the Law. Hillel, like Jesus, did say (T.B.Shab. 30b) that the first commandment is the Shema - 'Hear 0 Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord' - the profession of faith in God. Both agreed on the second commandment, the duty to one's neighbour. In giving priority to the profession of faith in God, was what is meant by taking on the yoke of Heaven - cf. M. Berakhoth 2 :2, and Tos. Berakhoth, (ibid.) where it is explicitely stated that the Yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven must proceed the Yoke of the Commandments. There was considerable agreement between Jesus and the Rabbis, but they differed on the connotation of Law. But Hillel in T.B. Shabbath 30b, when asked to summarise the Law, while standing on one foot, gave the Shema and Love of one's Neighbour, and said all the rest is commentary. But it was to him and the Rabbis very necessary commentary, in fact indispensable. The Commentary was also the Law, the Oral Law, and it is here Jesus would not have accepted their connotation of Law because as He says in Matt. 23 :23, 'these you ought to have done without neglecting the others', but the gravamen of His charge is, they ought not to have taken precedence over the weightier matters of the Law, e.g. justice, mercy and faith. But it was natural that the Rabbis' own elaborations of the Law raised first as a guard around the Law, became more important in their eyes as the things they were most concerned in seeing done, because they felt they were important in guarding the Law in general. It was a question of emphasis, and the emphasis shifted to the less essential from the more important which the niceties of the Law now being emphasised were supposed to protect. We have seen the same in the life of the Church.

32

PROLEGOMENA

Divisions have come about through honest attempts to guard some principle or practice. On essentials the parent denomination and the seceding group have not been at differences. Healthy rivalry between the sects may encourage living religion. The seceding sect, proud of its principles and with a still living faith, can stress its special principles which separate it from the parent body without neglecting its real raison d'etre. But in time, when the real live issue which sparked off the secession has become but a matter of antiquarian research, the interest slackens and the common Faith which was taken for granted by the seceders is found to have shrivelled up. Matters had not reached that stage in Rabbinism, but the danger was there. The emphasis on the fine points of the Law, which were to serve as a bulwark to the Law's observance was still a blazing issue. Some it did help to keep the Law itself, but others it did not and alienated completely. These Am ha-Aretz, these lost sheep of the House of Israel, were those to whom Jesus' mission was directed. But the Qumran Sectaries did not agree with the Rabbinic solution. They seem to have thought little of Rabbinic Halakhah. The present writer pointed out in 'Revue deQumran' vol. I, no. l1 that in the D.S.D there is evidence of criticism of the validity of Rabbinic Halakhah as affecting Purification, and purification by the ashes of the Red Heifer in particular. This was a bitter thrust at the Rabbinic system, because purification was fundamental. The Rabbis had tried and honestly tried to take upon themselves the fulfilling of the priestly laws of purification. The Rabbis did not think much of the Sadducean priests, nor did the Qumranists, but the Rabbis pre-70 for the fulfilment of the Law were tied to the perpetuation of the Sacrificial system and it was their task to keep the Sadducean priests up to the scratch as best they could. The sacrifice of the Red Heifer depended on properly, ritually pure priests, and it in turn was essential for the preparation of the ashes for the water of purification. When the Temple fell it struck a grievous blow at the Jewish system of purification which was essential if the Law was to be fulfilled. Thanks to the genius of Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai and those he trained, Judaism was able to survive and prosper, for study of the Law was made as good as doing. When the Mishnah was completed in 200 A.D. two thirds of the Law could not be fulfilled without Temple and priests. And remember in Pirke Aboth 1,2. Simeon the Just said that there were three things on which 1

'Did the Qumran Sect burn the Red Heifer?' Paris, June 1959.

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGGADAH

33

the world depends, one of which was the Temple Service (a sacrificial service); another was the Law. But a threefold cord cannot be easily broken, though one snaps - even one as important as the Temple Service - and Rabbinic Judaism concentrated on education in the Law. 'Study', says Maimonides in Hilkoth Talmud Torah 'leads to doing'. At least they knew the Faith that was in them. The Qumranists were extra particularists and shut themselves off from the impurities of the world and concentrated on the proper worship or service of God within their pure circle. They believed they were keeping the Mosaic Covenant and following the right path of Deuteronomy. To understand their position we cannot merely go back to Deuteronomy or the Written Law in its entirety, and think to understand them. The same applies to Rabbinic Judaism and to Christianity. But the importance of Haggadah in the normative Judaism post-70 A.D. was played down, and more and more emphasis was put on the Halakhah as the Mishnah compiled in 200 A.D. shows. Normative Judaism of the post-70 variety had not unchallenged possession of the field pre-70 A.D. In fact what became Normative Judaism was itself not the same as it had been pre-70 A.D. Travers Herford1 was quite wrong in making out that only the early Christians were full of apocalyptic and eschatological imaginings. Even the great Halakhic scholar Akiba, second only to Rabban Johanan b. Zakkai in his work for establishing Normative Judaism, was a Messianist as well, and declared Bar Kokhbah the Messiah in 133 A.D. Not only was Akiba interested in political Messianism, but he was associated with the Theosophic speculation which entered around the Ma'aseh Merkabah, the Midrashic development of Ezekiel, ch. 1, as witnesses T.B. Hagigah 13b etc. Ezekiel's chariot vision had its influence on Daniel, ch. 7, and on I Enoch. There is a danger that for systematic study of any field, hard and fast divisions are made sometimes purely that one aspect of the subject may be adequately coped with. Then after the name has been given, the thing takes on a separate life of its own. The Semitic concept of the power of a name is not confined to the ancient Semites. Having named Apocalyptic literature 'Apocalyptic literature' it becomes such and is necessarily regarded as quite separate from Rabbinic literature. It is not for nothing that the writer of Gen 2: 19 ,20 saw one important aspect of Adam's power over Creation as residing in his ability to give names to things; he gave them something of his own personality. And 1

'The Pharisees', op. cit.

34

PROLEGOMENA

so it is with scientific studies; the researcher gives something of his own approach, his own limitations to the corner of the field he studies, in subdividing, separating off and analysing. The Apocalyptic literature preserved in the Christian Church, but rejected by Normative Judaism was no more found in Hebrew. It seemed different from the Rabbinic works. It was not in Hebrew or Aramaic. Few of those who worked on it, with notable exceptions, were primarily Semitic scholars, and even fewer au fait with Rabbinic works, and so Apocalyptic literature was seen as being a genre of its own, certainly separate from Rabbinic studies. The truth is that Apocalyptic literature is an amorphous collection of material of several types, some of which can be paralleled with various aspects of Rabbinic writings, which themselves have considerable diversity. It is to be hoped that with the finding of so many Apocalyptic books in the Dead Sea Caves in the original Hebrew or Aramaic tongues, that this literature will be seen as truly Jewish and that its various genres will be studied in relation to such remnants of such surviving in Normative Jewish writings. It may mean eventually altering the classification of material and seeing anew old relationships which were not recognised partly because of the different and separate history of the transmission of the texts of the material, and partly because in recent and not so recent times the study of the two literatures has been regarded as different disciplines and has given different nomenclature. There is for example a Hebrew Enoch dating from the period of the late Amoraim or early Geonim in its present form. As Hebrew literature this could be, and is classed as Haggadic Midrash. There is the Apocalyptic book of Enoch preserved in Ethiopic rediscovered in the 18th. century, which is regarded as a Pseudepigraph in Apocalyptic literature. But they have much in common. We know that the Rabbis of the second century deliberately excluded certain books from the Canon. These Megilloth Genuzoth or Apocalyptic Books were not all entirely abandoned absolutely, witness Sepher Hanoch and also Ben Sira. This last is actually quoted in P. T. Berakhoth, 11 b1, and was used by the Qaraites. New Testament studies have undergone a similar separation from Jewish Rabbinic Studies. The Rabbinic authorities could not accept the New Testament. The Christians regarded it as in quite a separate class from Mishnah and Talmud which the Rabbinic Jews even before 1 cf. J. Bowman, 'The Importance of Samaritan Researches', in The Annual of the Leeds University Oriental Society, Brill, Leiden, 1959, pp. 40-47.

,

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGGADAH

35

their eventual committing to writing regarded as the Oral Law, and on at least a level with the written Law. The Church Fathers did however know of Jewish Haggadic Midrashim or homiletical commentaries on the Scripture, and the methods of Rabbinic Jewish homiletics. Irenaeus of the second century A.D. makes use of such as also did others later, notably Jerome. It is important to remember that Nicholas of Lyra in the Middle Ages translated Rashi's Commentary, and that study of this commentary influenced Luther according to the Tag 'Si Lyra non lyrasset, Lutherus non saltasset'. John Broughton in Elizabethan England in his 'Horne Hebraicae et Talmudicae' made available Rabbinic parallels to Gospel sayings. Montefiore and Abrahams last century showed how light could be cast on Gospel sayings and Jewish customs referred to in the Gospels. But both committed the rather serious mistake of regarding Rabbinic Jewish evidence from post first century A.D. as a reliable guide to Judaism in the early first century A.D. and preferring such toNewTestament evidence, avowedly sectarian that it was. As an example, we might look into the case of making broad the phylacteries in Matt. 23 :5, where Abrahams points out that Phylacteries cannot be made broad, and that therefore the writer of Matthew's Gospel or Jesus was in error. Actually, as I have shown in 'Studia Evangelica' 1959, there is here no reference to Jewish Tefillin popularly referred to even by Jews today as phylacteries, but to the Qame'in mentioned in M. Shabbath 3: 4, alongside of but quite different from phylacteries. The phylactery proper was as we see from Samaritan parallels an oblong piece of parchment with versicules of Scripture on it and the names of God. This was folded seven times, three from one end, three from the other to form a long string which could be broader or narrower as one wished, depending on the size of the original sheet of parchment and the width of the folds. This was worn over the arm, and was spoken of by the Samaritans as wearing the name of God. It was a semi-magical use of the Scripture combined perhaps with ostentation; it was believed that by wearing the phylactery one put on for protective purposes the Word andName of God. Jewish Qame'in, similar to the Samaritan and unfolded, were used until the Middle Ages and could be put up in a room where a woman would give birth and were believed to protect the child from Lilith and other demons. Strack-Billerbeck's 'Kommentar zum Neuen Testament' is a much more scientific and comprehensive use of Rabbinic material to illuminate Scripture, and is an important help for New Testament studies, but Studia Post-Biblica v1u

36

PROLEGOMENA

even it requires to be used with caution. In any case, for the New Testament student to accept parallels to prove or even to illuminate a verse or passage in the Gospels may be very practical, but it is not fair to Rabbinic literature to regard it as a mine to prove the New Testament. Rabbinic Literature exists in its own right, and deserves to be studied for itself. But apart from that, the student who uses Strack-Billerbeck without seeing the context in which the alleged parallel occurs in the Rabbinic literature in question, or without examining its date and the date of the individual Tanna, or Amara to whom it is attributed, is building on sand and has no sure foundation. Further, it would be helpful to his New Testament Studies if he did study some Rabbinic literature for its own sake, and be able to classify the general types and their characteristics, their dates and provenance, and also to learn something of the methods of Rabbinic Exegesis both Halakhic and Haggadic. It is important too to know the dates of the most important of the various Rabbis whose names occur in Mishnah and Talmud and Midrash, and whether their views are just recorded as minority opinions, or if the Halakhah was held to be according to their opinion, because just as all men are equal, all Halakhic opinions are Halakhah, but some are more Halakhic than others. This is because the term Halakhah has several meanings; The Way, one individual legal opinion as to some point, relating to the Way, or the generally accepted ruling on that point or the whole study of Halakhah in general. Rabbinic Literature is not always of one genre. Even the Mishnah has several, e.g. the Mishnah form pure and simple. The Mishnah begins M. Ber. 1: 1ff 'From what time in the evening may the Shema be recited? From the time when the priests enter (the Temple) to eat of their offerings(Num. 18: 8-20) until the end of the first watch.' So R. Eliezer, an old guard traditionalist but whose rulings are not Halakhah in the authoritative sense usually. But the Sages say, 'Until midnight' (which is the majority view and thereforeHalakhah.) Rabban Gamaliel says: 'Until the rise of dawn'. Here follows a Haggadic statement which may be history or not, cited for the sake of illustrating a Halakhic point. His sons once returned (after midnight) from a wedding feast. They said to him, 'We have not recited the Shema'. He said to them, 'If the dawn has not risen ye are (still) bound to recite it'. That was his view but not the strictest practice. 'Moreover, wheresoever the Sages prescribe "Until Midnight" the duty of fulfilment lasts until the rise of dawn'. So adds the compiler of the Mishnah and continues, 'The duty of burning the fat pieces and the

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGGADAH

37

members (of the animal offering), cf. Lev. 6:12; 7:3, 31,33, lasts until the rise of dawn; and for all (offerings) that must be consumed 'that same day' (Lev. 7:13ff), the duty lasts until the rise of dawn'. These are quite separate matters from the Shema, but are linked with the catch-phrase - 'until the rise of dawn'. The Mishnah here continues, 'Why then have the Sages said - Until midnight? To keep a man far from transgression', which shows why and how they attempted to put a hedge about the Law. As an example of Midrash, we might cite M. Yebamoth, 12:6, 'This is the prescribed rite of halitzah: When the man and his deceased brother's wife are come into the court, the judges proffer such advice to the man as befits him for it is written, "Then the elders of the city shall call him and speak unto him", (Deut. 25 :8). When a Mishnah is given without named authority it is called a setam and is regarded as authoritative. Another example of the Midrash method (M. Sanh. 2:4). 'He, (the king) must write out a scroll of the Law for himself; when he goes forth to battle he shall take it forth with him, and when he returns he shall bring it back with him; when he sits in judgement, it shall be with him, and when he sits at meat it shall be before him, for it is written, "It shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life'". (Deut. 17: 19) But there is Haggadic Midrash in the Mishnah too, cf. M. Sotah 9 :15. 'With the footprints of the Messiah, presumption shall increase and dearth reach its height'. (An interesting sentence as it is in Aramaic and not in Hebrew, the language of the Mishnah). 'The vine shall yield its fruit, but wine shall be costly; the empire shall fall into heresy and there shall be none to utter reproof. The council chamber shall be given to fornication. Galilee shall be laid waste and Gablan shall be made desolate; and the people of the frontier shall go about from city to city with none to take pity on them. The wisdom of the Scribes shall become insipid and they that shun sin shall be deemed contemptible, and truth shall nowhere be found. Children shall shame their elders, and the elders shall rise up before the children, "for the son treats the father with contempt, the daughter rises up against her mother, the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law: a man's enemies are the men of his own house'", (Mic. 7 :6). 'The face of this generation is as the face of a dog, and the son will not be put to shame by his father. On whom can we stay ourselves? - on our Father in Heaven'. This and two preceding Haggadic sections in M. Sotah 9,

38

PROLEGOMENA

15 were probably together here because they end with the question 'On whom can we stay ourselves? - on our Father in Heaven'. One of these other pieces is attributed to R. Pinhas b. Jair, the other to R. Eliezer, neither deal with the Messiah but the state of things after the Temple fell. Tractate Pirke Aboth is entirely Haggadic, but with very few exceptions its teaching is given in Mishnaic form though it is Haggadic and not Halakhic. R.Akiba, M. Aboth 3:14 said: 'The tradition is a fence around the Law; Tithes are a fence around riches; vows are a fence around abstinence; a fence around wisdom is silence.' However in the next Mishnah, M. Aboth 3:15 he employs theMidrashic form: 'He used to say - 'Beloved is man for he was createdin the image (of God), still greater was the love in that it was made known to him that he was created in the image of God, as it is written - "For God made man in His own image -" ', (Gen. 9 :6). 'Beloved are Israel for they were called Children of God; still greater was the love in that it was made known to them that they were called children of God, as it is written "You are the sons of the Lord your God"', (Deut. 14:1). 'Beloved are Israel, for to them was given the precious instrument; still greater was the love, in that it was made known to them that to them was given the precious instrument by which the world was created, as it is written "For I give you good precepts, do not forsake my teaching"', (Prov. 4 :2). This last is worth quoting not only as showing Haggadic Midrash but for the doctrine which Akiba the great Halakhic scholar expounds. Creation in the image of God, Israel the sons of God, but the supreme mark of God's love is that He gave Israel the Law by which the world was created. Whether he really can deduce these doctrinal points from the Law or not, he cites Holy Scripture as support, as he did in many cases on Halakhic points even though either the Halakhah had existed in Mishnah form, or it is a new Halakhah of his own which he purports to deduce from the Law by means of his (to us) somewhat artificial hermeneutical methods. Akiba is responsible for the come-back staged by the Midrash method in the second century A.D. The Midrash antedates the Mishnaic, but not all Midrash is old. That associated with the name of Akiba is new though in Midrashic form with Biblical support supplied. In the cases of this Midrash cited here it could be ante-Christian, but it might well be post-Christian and stressing that Israel, the Jewish community is still sons of God and that God's love to them was seen at its greatest in the giving of the Law to which they should remain faithful. Another Haggadic Midrash

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGGADAH

39

in M. Aboth 5:19 definitely seems post-Christian. No name is attached to it so it is impossible to date apart from internal evidence which centres round Balaam. The Midrash is interesting as being one of the number type of sayings which are grouped together in M. Aboth 5 :19, 'He in whom are these three things, is one of the disciples of Abraham our father, but (he in whom are) three other things is of the disciples of Balaam the wicked. A good eye, and a humble spirit and a lowly soul - (they in whom these are) are the disciples of Abraham our father. An evil eye, a haughty spirit, and a proud soul -(they in whom are these) are of the disciples of Balaam the wicked. How do the disciples of Abraham our father differ from the disciples of Balaam the wicked? The disciples of Abraham our father enjoy this world and inherit the world to come as it is written "endowing with wealth those who love me, and filling their treasuries (Prov. 8:21)". The disciples of Balaam the wicked inherit Gehenna, and go down to the pit of destruction as it is written "But thou, 0 God, wilt cast them down into the lowest pit, men of blood and treachery shall not live out half their days" (Ps. 55 :24).' It is perhaps fitting to end these citations with M. Aboth 6 :6, which though it is post-Mishnaic and might be medieval, well sums up devotion to the Law both Written and Oral. Very important is the emphasis on reporting what one has learnt in the name of the teacher who taught it, and this should be borne in mind in accessing Peter's and Mark's reliability in handing on their tradition: 'Greater is (learning in) the Law than priesthood or kingship; for kingship is acquired by thirty excellences, and the priesthood by twenty-four; but (learning in) the Law by forty-eight. And these are they: by study, by the hearing of the ear, by the ordering of the lips, by the understanding of the heart, by the discernment of the heart, by reverence, by humility, by cheerfulness; by attendance on the Sages, by consorting with fellow students, by close arguments with disciples, by assiduity, by (knowledge of) Scripture and Mishnah; by moderation in business, worldly occupation, pleasure, sleep, conversation, and jesting; by longsuffering, by a good heart, by faith in the Sages, by submission to sorrow, (by being) one that recognises his place and rejoices in his lot, and that makes a fence around his words and that claims no merit for himself; by being (one that is) beloved, that loves God, that loves mankind, that loves well-doing, that loves rectitude, that loves reproof, that shuns honour and boasts of his learning, and delights not in making decisions, that helps his fellow to

40

PROLEGOMENA

bear his yoke, and that judges him favourably, and that establishes him in the truth and establishes him in peace; and that occupies himself assiduously in his study, (by being one) that asks and makes answer, that hearkens and adds thereto; that learns in order to teach and that learns in order to practise; that makes his teacher wiser, that retells exactly what he has heard and reports a thing in the name of him that said it. Lo, thou hast learnt that he who tells a thing in the name of him who said it brings deliverance unto the world, for it is written 'And Esther told the king in the name of Mordecai' (Esth. 2:22).' The Talmud or Gemara, the production of the Amoraim who discussed the Mishnah for 300 years (200-500 A.D.) to determine what of the babble of individual opinions of Halakhah should be regarded as Halakhah and also commenting on the gnomic expressions of the Mishnah, did not always and solely deal with Halakhic matters. There is much Haggadah in the Talmud introduced both to lighten exacting study of Halakhic points, and also by some detail in the Haggadah to illustrate or even support the legal point being argued. One must not attempt to build a dogmatic system on Haggadic statements in Jewish literature. Rabbinic Judaism is free of credal statements which must be accepted, apart from 'Hear 0 Israel, the Lord thy God is one Lord'. True, there was Maimonides' formulation of thirteen points of belief, which although printed in Singer's Prayer Book has not been in the past, nor is it now everywhere accepted. Haggadah repeats the individual opinions of godly learned men and as such merits attention as expressions of personal opinion, but it is not binding in the same way as Halakhah. It may not always have been the case, as the present writer has pointed out in 'Samaritan Studies' B.J.R.L. vol. 40, pp. 309f. 1958. It could be that Rabbinic Judaism post- 70, when putting its house in order after the destruction of the Temple, decided to put the emphasis on Halakhah and no more on the Haggadah, all the more so as the Samaritans stress Hagaddah and not Halakhah. In Samaritanism the 613 laws of the Torah are kept. There has been no future development of an Oral Law like the Jews putting such tradition on a level with the Scriptures; but there has been a development of doctrine and a creed and a rudimentary system of Theology. One wing of the Samaritans, the Dositheans, was influenced by Jewish beliefs, e.g., the Resurrection and eschatological views. It is alleged by the Samaritans that its founder was a Jew, probably of the period of John Hyrcanus, when the sect seemed to have started. There could have been danger to Judaism from the Samaritan side

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGGADAH

41

by the influence of Samaritan Gnostic ideas which the Dositheans later developed if Haggadah retained its importance in Judaism. But the greatest danger would be from the Christian Mission, especially Pauline Christianity. If one were classifying the New Testament, the Gospels and epistles from the point of view of Jewish literature, one would have to say that they were all Haggadic Midrashic compilations with a few Halakhic Midrashic passages, and even fewer Halakhic Mishnaic passages. The Mishnah form of teaching as represented in M. Pirke Aboth is seen also to be employed in dealing with Haggadah. But in the New Testament, Haggadah though similar in literary form to Jewish Haggadah expects acceptance as authoritative in the same way as Jewish Halakhah. The New Testament is recognisable even today to the Jewish student as Haggadah. It was more of a danger to first century Judaism than heathen philosophy, for it used Jewish literary types, Jewish methods of exegesis, and claimed to be the fulfilment of the Jewish Bible. The Rabbis at the end of the first century did not succeed in quelling Messianic expectations in their own ranks, nor those that calculated the end, 1 but by putting all the emphasis on practice and not belief, on the Law and its demands, they perfected the shaping of the tool which Ezra had started to make, and which kept the Jews loyal to God and His Law and the Congregation of Israel no matter wherever they were and with whom they were. The Mishnah, Sotah 9:15 says that when R. Meir died, there were no more makers of parables. This is hyperbole, but one might say that it indicated that up to his time mid-second century, the 2 parable 1 Rabbi Samuel bar Nahman insisted that the words ypi;i n£>'i (A. V. Hab. 2: 3) (at the end it shall speak) were to be understood in the sense of an anathema and should be rendered thus: 'Let there be rottenness in the bones of those that calculate the end, who say, because the former calculations have failed, therefore Messiah will never come'. Continue to wait for Him, for it is said: 'Though He tarry, wait for Him.' 2 As an example of a parable from the Talmud we cite T. B. Shab. 153a: Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai said: It is like a king who invited his servants to a banquet, but did not appoint the time. The wise among them adorned themselves and waited at the entrance of the king's palace saying: 'Can there be anything wanting at the king's house which may delay the banquet?' But the foolish among them went about their work, saying: 'Can there be a banquet without preparation?' Suddenly the king asked for his servants; the wise among them entered adorned, and the foolish came into his presence soiled. The king rejoiced to meet the wise servants, but was angry with the foolish servants. 'Let those', said he, 'who adorned themselves for the ban· quet, sit down to eat and drink, but let those who have not adorned themselves for the banquet stand and look on'.

42

PROLEGOMENA

had been common. They are found both in Talmud and Midrash. It is also said that when R. Hanina b. Dosa died, the workers of miracles ceased. In M. Ber. 5 :5 it is said of R. Hanina b. Dosa that he used to pray over the sick and say: 'this one will live', or 'this one will die'. They said to him, 'How do you know?' He replied: 'If my prayer is fluent in my mouth I know that he is accepted; and if it is not I know that he is rejected.' But there are miracle stories in the Haggadic portions of the Talmud1 • In T.B. Shab. 152b is the following parable: A king once distributed royal robes among his servants. Those that were wise, folded them up and laid them by in a coffer, and those that were foolish wore them on working days. When the king demanded back his robes, those given to the wise were returned free from stains, whilst those of the foolish were soiled. The king, pleased with the wise servants, ordered their robes to be deposited in his treasury, and them to depart in peace. But he showed his displeasure at the foolish servants, sent their robes to the wash, and them to prison. So the bodies of the righteous Israelites, whose merits preponderate, 'enter into peace and rest in their beds' (cf. Isa. 57 :2), and 'their souls are bound up in the bundle of life' (cf. 1 Sam. 25: 29). But as regards the bodies of the foolish, 'there is no peace', says the Lord, 'for the wicked.' (Isa. 48: 22), and 'their souls are slung out, as out of the middle of a sling.' (I Sam. 25: 29). 1 As an example of miracles one may cite T. B. Baba Metzia 59b where we are told of miracles by R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus, wrought by him to prove his Halakhic opinion. First a Carob tree was uprooted, then a stream of water reversed its course; but his Rabbinical colleagues, who were his opponents, were unmoved. Next the walls of the Academy were bidden to incline if his opinion was right that the Oknai Tannur (stove) was clean. Incline they did and would have fallen, had they not been rebuked by Rabbi Joshua. 'Dare you, he cried, interfere in the Halakhic contentions of the disciples of the wise?' And so we are told in the Haggadah the walls remain standing today out of respect for both R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus and Rabbi Joshua. Heaven was next called to judge between Eliezer and the others. A Bath Qol (heavenly voice) issued, proclaiming 'Desist from Rabbi Eliezer; for the Halakhah is always as he states it. Rabbi Joshua cried out: 'The Law is no longer in Heaven, it was given to us on Mt. Sinai long ago. We cannot accept the authority of a Bath Qol which overrules an express law, viz. "to incline after many" (cf. Ex. 23: 2) (which actually gives a warning against 'turning aside after a multitude' so as to pervert justice). Eliezer was excommunicated by the majority. Rabbi Nathan met Elijah the prophet who acted as a sort of Black Rod between the Upper or Heavenly Beth Din and the Lower House. Elijah said that God said that His children had that day had the better of Him. Rabbi Eliezer's excommunication did however affect the course of nature: harvest of fruit and grain were poor. Everything on which Rabbi Eliezer fixed his eyes was blasted as if with fire. Rabban Gamliel was caught in a hurricane at sea. He realized he was going to suffer for his part in the excommunication. 'Lord of the Universe', he said: 'Thou knowest that I have not done it for the furtherance of my own honour or that of my father, but for the promotion of Thy Glory, which would have been compromised, had such contentions been tolerated in Israel.' Immediately a perfect calm ensued. Gamliel's sister Imma Shalom was Rabbi Eliezer's wife; it was thereafter her constant concern to see that Eliezer should not pray to God for her brother's death. One day called away from her husband, she found when she returned Rabbi Eliezer prostrate in supplication, and knew her brother's life was forfeit. Rabbi Eliezer represented the

THE LAW: HALAKHAH AND HAGADAH

43

The problem which faces us is although gnomic sayings, Midrashic passages, parables and miracle stories, such as we associate with the Gospels can be found in the Haggadic portions of the Talmud and in the Jewish Midrashic collections, is there any literary parallel in early Judaism to say, the Gospel of Mark as a whole? Or must we say that the composition while its several bits can be paralleled in early Jewish literature, is a unique type of composition seen as a whole. older school of first century Rabbis. The issue was bigger than the particular bone of Halakhic contention on whether a particular stove was clean or not. Eliezer was an old time traditionalist, and he stood in the way of the new academic theoretical Halakhah.

CHAPTER FOUR

THE LAW AND THE SUPERNATURAL Perhaps it is best at this point to turn again to consideration of that phrase in Peter's sermon to Cornelius 'and going about healing all that were oppressed by the devil.' (Acts 10:38). This is a significant phrase with which to describe the Gospel ministry of Jesus. It is perhaps not what modern scholars would apply to the ministry of Jesus as they understand it. The Dead Sea Discipline Manual, col. III & IV states that 'All that is and ever was comes from a God of knowledge' and proceeds to declare that 'Before things came into existence He determined the plan of them. His plan cannot be altered and He controls everything.' God created man to rule the world, and God it was who arranged that two spirits, one of truth and one of perversity should have general surveyance of him until the final Inquisition. These spirits of Truth and Perversity are related in some undefined sort of way to the sources of Light and Darkness respectively. 'The origin of truth lies in the Fountain of Light, and that of Perversity in the Wellspring of darkness. It is not said that "Truth" and "Perversity" are identical with the respective angels. All who practise righteousness (so Gaster1 translates) are under the domination of the Prince of Lights, and walk in the ways of light, whereas all who practise perversity are under the domination of the Angel of Darkness and walk in the ways of darkness. Through the Angel of Darkness, however, even those who practise righteousness are made liable to error. All their sin and their iniquities, all their guilt and their deeds of transgression are a result of his domination, and this, by God's inscrutable design, will continue until the time appointed by Him. Moreover, all men's afflictions and all their moments of tribulation are due to this being's malevolent sway. All the spirits that attend upon him are bent on causing the sons of Light to stumble.' God is not disinterested, we are told by the Manual of Discipline; in fact 'the God of Israel and the Angel of His Truth are always there to help the sons of Light.' Yet it is God who created 1 'The Scriptures of the Dead Sea Sect' Secker and Warburg, London, 1957, pp. 53f.

THE LAW AND THE SUPERNATURAL

45

both these spirits, the Manual reiterates, and made them as Gaster translates 'the (instigators) of every deed and the directors of every thought.' The Manual adds that God loves one of the two spirits, i.e. the Spirit of Light 'to all eternity, and is always pleased with his deeds. God Himself hates the other spirit, and all his ways to the end of time.' The Manual then expatiates on how the two spirits work on man, giving examples of the fruits as it were of the respective spirits, and the respective rewards. The reward of those that walk in the ways of the Spirit of Truth, i.e. the Prince of Lights is 'health and abundant well-being, with long life and fruition of seed along with eternal blessings and everlasting joy in the life everlasting, and a crown of glory, and a robe of honour, amid light perpetual.' The reward of all who walk in the way of the Spirit of Perversity, i.e. the Angel of Darkness is 'multitude of afflictions at the hands of all the angels of destruction, everlasting perdition through the angry wrath of an avenging God, eternal horror and perpetual reproach, the disgrace of final annihilation in the Fire, darkness throughout the vicissitudes of life in every generation, doleful sorrow, bitter misfortune and darkling ruin - ending in extinction without remnant or survival.' Mankind is enlisted under the banner of each. There is the suggestion that man is born into either camp, which reminds one of the generations of light and the generations of darkness in the Samaritan Malef1, where it is said that the result of Eve's seduction by Belial disguised as the serpent, was Cain and Abel, and that Cain was the ancestor of the Children of Darkness. This in turn reminds one of what according to John 8 :44 was said by Jesus of His opponents, that they were descendants of their father, the devil. On the other hand the Samaritans claim (cf. Malef) that they are the Children of Light and the pure seed descended from Seth of whose birth it is said (Gen. 5 :3) 'and (Adam) begat a son in his own likeness, after his image.' Adam had been made in the image of God. Not only is there hostility between the two angels but between the two camps of their followers, who are under their direct control. The Manual of Discipline does admit - 'God in His inscrutable wisdom has appointed a term for the existence of perversity, and when the time of the Inquisition comes, He will destroy it for ever.' However, 'Thus far, the spirits of Truth and Perversity have been struggling in 1 cf.]. Bowman 'Samaritan Studies' Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, vol. 40, no. 2. March 1958, pp. 302-306.

46

PROLEGOMENA

the heart of man. Men have walked both in wisdom and folly. If a man casts his portion with truth, he does righteously and hates perversity: ifhe casts it with perversity, he does wickedly and abominates truth. For God has apportioned them in equal measure until the final age, until He makes all things new.' Even the Sons of Light were not unassailed or unsullied in this age given over virtually to the Angel of Darkness. The Manual does admit the dominion of perversity in this present age, though careful to assure its readers that God had created both spirits and that the good spirit and his followers would in the end be victorious. Even so, despite its long term optimism it is pessimistic in tone about the present, so much so that the Qumranists left the world and retired to the wilderness. The more orthodox Judaism of the Rabbis believed in good and bad spirits. Demons were held to be responsible for the various diseases. Shabriri cf. T.B. Pes. 112a, T.B. Ab. Zar. 12b, was the demon of blindness who rested on uncovered water at night and blinded those who drunk it. Then there was ruah zeladah 'the spirit of catalepsy,' and ruah zelahtah and ruah palga. This last was the spirit of the megrim and hovered on palmtrees (T .B. Pes. 111 b; T .B. Hul. 105b; T.B. Git. 68b). Ben nefilim was the demon of epilepsy, and ruah kezarit the spirit of nightmare (T.B. Ber. 14b, Tos. Bek. 5, 3). Ruah zara'at was the spirit ofleprosy (T.B. Ket. 61b). Bat Lorin was a demon that brought disease of the eye to one who did not wash his hands after meals. There is a reference in T.B. Rosh ha Shanah 28a, and Sifre Debarim 318, to such demons entering the body and causing the disease while overwhelming their victim. Kefa'o shed is the expression used. T.B. Shab. 101b speaks of the demons seizing the victim; ahazo is the expression there used. According to M. Aboth 5 :6 evil spirits were one of the things created between the suns at nightfall on the eve of the Sabbath at the end of the week of Creation. They had no bodies. The demons were under a king or leader variously named Ashmodai, Targum to Eccles. 1 :13, T.B. Pes. 110a, P.T. Shek. 49b, Num. R.V., or Samuel who is Rosh satanim, Deut. R.XI; Pirke R.El.13. Lilith is the queen of demons and according to Gen. R.XX, and T.B. Erub. 18b, Adam after his Fall fell further with Lilith and fathered the evil spirits which are on earth. This is all haggadah and it is not to be wondered at if different origins are ascribed to the spirits. That Lilith is called the mother of Ahriman C1·~"1in) in T.B. Baba Bathra 73b;

THE LAW AND THE SUPERNATURAL

47

T.B. Er. 100b; T.B. Nid. 24b, probably correctly shows the Persian origin of these demons. R. Akiba cf. T.B. Ab. Zar. 55b seems to have equated diseases with demon possession requiring exorcism. Rabban J ohanan b. Zakkai (in Pesikta 40b) speaking of evil spirits entering a person says 'what should be done with one so affected? Take roots of herbs, burn them under him and surround him with water, whereupon the spirit will flee.' While the Talmud did not question the reality of demons cf. T.B. Shab. 101a, 109a; T.B. Hul. 105a; T.B. Ber. 3a; T.B. Pes. 109b, 112a; T.B. Meg. 3a. T.B. Yeb. 122a, yet they were never an integral feature of the later normative Rabbinic Jewish Theological thinking. There are traces of evil angels Ps. 78: 49 destroying angels, cf. I Chron. 21, 15 and evil spirits, cf. 1 Sam. 16, 14f. in the Old Testament, but they all are only the messengers or angels of the one God. That is not to say that they were always regarded as such. However, popular beliefs while bleached out of the books of the Sacred Canon would survive at least as superstitions. The influence of Zoroastrianism perhaps was not altogether countered by such teaching as Isa. 45 :7, 'I form the light and create the darkness, make peace and create evil; I the Lord, do all these things.' (so A.V.); and the superstition learnt in the Babylonian Exile would be taken back to Palestine; whereas those of the Jews that remained in the Babylonian Exile till the Talmudic period and beyond, added to their knowledge of what demons were responsible for what. The evil spirits were older than Zoroastrianism, but Zoroastrianism with its dualism marshalled good spirits under Ormuzd and evil under Ahriman. This could eventually have led to the concept of a kingdom of heaven (rule by God) and over against it a kingdom of evil, (a sort of Satanic dominion) not in different places but over mankind. In the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline we have seen the concept of the two spirit princes under God and mention is made of the minor spirits under them. In the Apocalyptic and Pseudepigraphical literature we have more information. In Tobit 3:8 Ashmodai, the king of the demons kills seven would-be husbands of Sara, until the angel Raphael explains what charm to concoct to drive him out. In the book of Jubilees, 15 :33 Belial is the Satanic prince. In the Ascension of Isaiah 2 :4 he rules over this world. The Testament of the Twelve patriarchs throws much light on the background of thought in the passage cited above from the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline. In the Testament of Simeon 6:6-7 and the Testament of Zebulun 9 :8 when Belial and the evil spirits under him

48

PROLEGOMENA

are crushed, the heathen world will be converted to God. The Testament of Levi 18 :12-19 :3, also shows that Belial is the opponent of God the source of Light, and the opponent of God's Law. These latter points are also covered in the Testament of Judah 25 :3, Issachar 6, Dan 5, Zebulun 9, Naphtali 8, Benj. 7 and Joseph 20. Belial is the spirit of hatred, darkness, deception and error. Here definitely in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs we are dealing not with superstitions about individual demons and diseases, but a concept of a kingdom of evil, spiritual evil in opposition to God. The collision is the more direct in that it is not cushioned as in the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline where the Prince of Darkness is opposed to the Spirit of Light and both are under the God of Knowledge. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs are Jewish documents preserved only by the Christian Church in translation; but now in the Dead Sea Caves, fragments of these Testaments have been found in the original language. The Dead Sea Sectaries, a Jewish Sect, were at least au fait with their contents, if not indeed responsible for their composition. Jewish Apocalyptic literature and the Dead Sea Sectarian have much in common. But there is common ground between Rabbinic Haggadic, and Apocalyptic literature, and that of the New Testament on this struggle between good and evil; cf. T.B. Suk. 52a, Assumption of Moses 10:3ff, Matt. 25 :41, Rev. 12 :9 for the idea of the cosmic battle of Satan with the Lord God which must end in Satan, the old serpent and his angels (evil spirits) being finally overthrown. The idea of the serpent as the power of darkness goes back to Babylonian mythology and the combat of Marduk and Tiamat. Traces of the struggle, the creation struggle which has never finished - for Leviathan or Rahab are but held in check, peep through in several places in the Old Testament. Hebrew monotheism transformed Tiamat into the Tehom, the deep, but her alter ego, the dragon of the sea, Tannin becomes the constellation of the dragon in which twice a year the moon is eclipsed by the sun, and provides for the Samaritans the two focal points of their six month calendar. The connection between the cosmic version of the Dragon of the deep imprisoned in the waters above instead of below, and the struggle between light and darkness perhaps survives here in a truncated form. The identification of the struggle between light and darkness and moral good and evil is most clearly hinted at in Rev. 12 :9 - 'And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan the deceiver of the whole world -

THE LAW AND THE SUPERNATURAL

49

he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.' (cf. the present writer's paper to the XXVth. Congress of Orientalists, Moscow, 1960). Rabbinic Judaism as we have seen earlier did not deny the reality of demons in causing disease, nor did it deny the reality of Satan, but whereas here and there we have traces of prophylactics not very different from those of their heathen neighbours, the Rabbis did stress that the Law (Written and Oral) is the great prophylactic of all. Rabbinic Judaism stood out against dualism, even the veiled dualism of the Dead Sea Sect's variety. Perhaps the following quotation from T.B. Kiddushin 30b sums up best the position of early Rabbinic Judaism: 'The Holy One, blessed be He! said to Israel - I have created the tempter, and his antidote, the Law. If you engage in the study of the latter, you are not delivered into his hand; as it is said: "If you do well, exaltation Tl~!V, i.e. you are above him; if not you are delivered into his hand; as it is said: "Sin lies at the door," Moreover the tempter is always bent upon leading you astray, as it is said: "And to you shall be his desire,'' But if you will study the Law, "You shall rule over him".' In the opinion of the Rabbis, the Yetzer ha- Ra, and the Yetzer haTov, the Evil and the Good inclinations were implanted by God in every man. They are not outside him as they would appear to be in the Dead Sea Discipline Manual with its Angel of Light, and its Angel of Darkness; nor is mankind divided up into two camps, one camp having the Yetzer ha-Ra, and the other the Yetzer ha-Tov from birth, as does the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline wich indicates that those under the two opposing angelic princes are of the generations Jf light and the generations of darkness. Generations here should be understood vertically and not horizontally. The Rabbinic position is probably fairly summed up by Rab Nahman bar Rab Hisda in T.B. Berakhoth 61a, in explaining why there are two yods in the word i:s"i (and the Lord God formed man) where one yod would have been sufficient. The reason is that it alludes to the two thoughts (c•i:s\ tendencies or inclinations), the good and the evil, which the Holy One, blessed be He, has implanted in Man. 1 But, asked Rab Nahman bar Isaac, do not 1 The idea of the Yetzer ha-Ra is derived by the Rabbis from Gen. 8 :21, where the statement occurs 'for the imagination Ci:s•) of man's heart is evil from his youth.' But cf. also Deut. 31:21 and Isa. 26:3. Ben Sira 15:14: 'God created man from his beginning ... and gave him into the hand of his Yetzer.' In this last the Yetzer may be either good or bad, indeed within him or without. As he is controlled so he chooses (v.17) either life or death, cf. Deut. 30:19. While Rabbinic

50

PROLEGOMENA

animals manifest evil tendencies, though the word ,~._, does not occur in connection with their creation. It must allude then to the mental conflict, as Rabbi Simeon ben Pasi used to say: 'Woe unto me, by reason of my Creator i~i\ if I do not obey Him, and woe unto me by reason of my evil inclinations, ·i~\ if I do obey him.' T.B. Shab. 105b says 'whoever tears his garments, breaks his tools, or scatters his money in anger, ought to be considered as an idolater. For that is the way of the 'evil imagination'; today he tells him: do this: tomorrow, do that. At last he tells him, Worship the stars, and he does so. Rab Abin gave as Scripture authority the text(Ps. 81 :10) 'There shall no strange God be in you; neither shall you worship any strange God.' What strange God is there in the body of man? Assuredly the evil imagination. Even here the Yetzer ha-Ra is surely partly on the way to be personified, virtually equated as it is with the strange god par excellence. However considerably earlier Rab Simeon ben Lakish had said: 'The evil thought of man (another name for Satan) prevails over him every day, and seeks to slay him; as it is said: (Ps. 37:32): "The wicked watches the righteous, and seeks to slay him." And did not the Holy One, blessed be He! come to his assistance, man could not resist it; as it is said (Ps. 37 :33): "The Lord will not abandon him to his power, or let him be condemned when he is brought to trial." Says Rab. Simeon ben Lakish elsewhere, T.B. Baba Bathra 16a, 'Satan, evil imagination and the angel of death, are different names of one and the same individual. '1 Again in T.B. Sukkah 52a we read that the School of Rabbi Ishmael taught: 'If that defiler (tempter) encounters you, drag him into the debating room; if he be as hard as a stone, he will yield to the influence of the Law, as the stone yields to the action of water, which is typical of the Law (Isa. 55: 1); if he be as hard as iron, it will break him to pieces, as the hammer breaks the rock' (]er. 23:29). This last dictum literature is occasionally optimistic in tone about the Yetzer ha-Ra (e.g. Without it a man would never marry, beget, build a house, or trade, M. Gen. R. IX, 9: cf. also Sifre Deut. 32 that man in fulfilling the command to love God with all his heart must love Him with his two Y etzers ), often however the Yetzer ha-Ra is synonym for all that is wicked in man: according to T.B. Sukk. 52b even God regretted having created the Yetzer ha-Ra. And yet in T.B. Sotah 47a, Sanh. 107b, the Yetzer ha-Ra is seen as a challenge to man, which he must master; and cf. T. B. Yoma 69b, without the Yetzer ha-Ra the world would not continue to exist. 1 R. Jonathan (T.B. Sukk. 52b) on the other hand held that Yetzer ha-Ra like Satan misled man in this world, and testified against him in the world to come.

THE LAW AND THE SUPERNATURAL

51

represents the absolute trust of the Rabbis in the Law as the panaceaI. Remembering the relationship between sin and death, it is not surprising that the Law is prophylactic against death too. In T.B. Makkoth 10b, we are told Rab Hisda was studying the Law in the academy of Rab, and the angel of death could not approach him, as long as he continued repeating the Law. The angel of death therefore climbed up a cedar tree, and splitting it, caused a momentary interruption in the Rabbi's study by the noise thus made, and so overcame him. The concept of good and bad angels is in the Law itself (cf. the destroying angel of Ex. 12 :23, who slew the Egyptian firstborn, and the angel of the Lord that goes with Israel in the wilderness). The destroying angels are already in the plural in Ezekiel 9 :4ff. T.B. Shabbath SSa paraphrases that verse somewhat significantly. 'The Holy One blessed be He! said to Gabriel: Go and make an inkmark upon the foreheads of the righteous, in order that the destroying angels may have no power over them; but make a blood mark upon those of the wicked, that the destroying angels may have power over them.' In the Bible account only 'six men' are mentioned, cf. Ezek. 9 :2; but 'with them was a man clothed in linen, with a writing case at his side.' Those marked were not to be slain. In the haggadic version the destroying angels are to have no power over them, which could mean other things, including no power to 'possess' them. In T.B. Pesachim 112b, it is said that no one should go out alone on Wednesday nights and Sabbath nights; for Iggereth, the daughter of Machloth (MixxAoi;), accompanied by eighteen myriads of destroying angels, then roams about, and every one of her band has power to destroy for himself. Formerly they used to go forth every day. Once however, she encountered Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa, and said to him: 'Had they not proclaimed in Heaven - Take heed of Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa and his knowledge of the Law, I would injure you.' 'Well' said he, 'if I am so favourably regarded in Heaven, I herewith banish you from all inhabited parts.' Upon this she begged him to give her some release, and he left her free to go forth on Wednesday and Sabbath nights. She subsequently encountered Abayye, and making the same remark to him, he banished her altogether. But (it is asked) do we not see that she still issues forth? (Answer) It is only stragglers, whose horses strayed into inhabited parts, and they come to fetch them. 1 cf. also T.B. Sukk. 52b. T.B. Kid. 30b for the Torah as the great antidote for the Yetzer ha-Ra. BOWMAN -

The Gospel of Mark

5

52

PROLEGOMENA

Hanina ben Dosa was a famous miracle worker and we shall have occasion to refer to miracles by him later on. He belonged to the second generation of the Tannaim, c.80-120 A.D. The Tannaim believed not only in evil angels but good angels. The Tosefta Shabbath 17 :2-3 tells us that the wicked are accompanied by the angels of Satan; the righteous by the angels of God. The righteous were those who observed the Law (Written and Oral), and did not the Oral Law command the wearing of Tefillin at morning prayer during the week? Did it not command that there should be a Mezuza on the lintel of the door? Did it not command the wearing of the Zizit? Did it not command the saying of the Shema? In doing so while carrying out the ordinances of the Law regarding them, one was safeguarding oneself against the evil powers cf. T.B. Ber. Sa, and every observance of the Law is a protection - T.B. Sotah 21a. The Birkath Kohanim protects against the evil powers, Num. R.XI. The left hand with the Tefillin strapped thereon was surrounded with thousands of guardian angels (Midrash Tehillin on Ps. 91 :4). Satan was however especially prevented from doing any harm to Israel on Passover eve, the anniversary of the great deliverance from bondage, cf. T.B. Pes. 109b. This last view was shared by other than the Rabbis and was older than the Tannaitic period. It had been already enumerated in Jubilees 48 :15. It is interesting that the Exodus was not only associated with deliverance from Egyptian bondage, but with freedom for that night anyway, from the onslaughts of the devil. It may be argued that to observe the commandment relating to the Sukkah protected against evil power (T.B. Pes, 187b). In fact those fulfilling any mitzwah or ordinance of the Law need fear no evil powers (T.B. Pes. 8b). This undoubtedly became the stand of Rabbinic Judaism; the more they were confronted by belief in demons, the more important, observance of the Law as a whole in all its minutae was felt to be. It was the whole armour of God. But very special significance did attach to the 'Night of Watching' Passover Eve. Targum Jerushalmi did teach that there were four Passovers of special significance: the first of these Passovers God created the world; the second of these Passovers. God made the Covenant 'between the pieces' with Abraham; the third was the actual Passover at the Exodus out of Egypt; on the fourth, Messiah would come on the clouds with Moses from the wilderness. The Samaritans (cf. Memar Marqa) knew this tradition too.

CHAPTER FIVE

HOPES OF DELIVERANCE BASED ON THE EXODUS The Exodus was a reality and is a reality to all Jews. In keeping the Passover one recreates as it were the actual Divine Occasion of deliverance from oppression and bondage. It is not to be wondered at that when Judah in the Babylonian Exile looked for deliverance, Second Isaiah recalled the deliverance from Egypt, cf. especially Isa. 11 :16 - 'And there will be a highway from Assyria for the remnant which is left of his people, as there was for Israel when they came up from the land of Egypt.' In Isaiah 12 is the new song of deliverance they will sing recalling in verse 2 and 5 the very words of the Song of Moses, Ex. 15 :2 on crossing the Sea of Reeds. Isaiah 63: 11-14, tells of how God remembered the days of old, Moses and his people, saying, 'Where is he who brought up out of the sea the shepherds of his flock? Where is he who put in the midst of them his holy Spirit?' The return from Exile was a new Exodus, but life in the promised land did not measure up to the hopes that had been placed in it, and had been encouraged by the prophet. In a sense, their troubles far from being over had but begun. It took some sixteen years after the Return before the Temple was rebuilt.AndZerubbabel whomHaggai and Zechariah had seen as the promised Messiah fades into the background. He was of the stock of David and could have been the anointed (n•itn~) King. But international pressures were against Judah having a king. The High Priest Joshua had his troubles with the unnamed accuser or adversary (there is no need to understand Satan here (Zech. 3 :1,2) as the devil). Presumably Zadokite high priest that he was, he was ceremonially impure returning from a land impure. Whether his antagonists were the Abiatharite priestly family who had a long quarrel with the Zadokite priestly family going back to the time of Solomon, or whether the antagonists were Samaritans, the theocratic form of government succeeded where the monarch failed, and the high priesthood remained in the Zadokite priestly family. The hope of the corning of the Davidic Anointed King Messiah was deferred but not abandoned. The bonds of the theocracy were tightened

54

PROLEGOMENA

when Nehemiah in 444 B.C. managed to build the wall of Jerusalem to protect the Temple, and to keep out unwanted Samaritans and others. Ezra later in 397 B.C. bound the people to the Law and made Judah the people of the Book. Until the second century B.C. the Zadokite family ruled the tiny priest state under Persians and then Greeks. Ben Sira, author of what became later called Ecclesiasticus, reflects the enlightened urbane but truly pious ethics for the ordinary man, dispensed in the priestly Batte ha-Midrash (Houses of Study), But not all was well with the priesthood and in 180 Onias III was slain and the loyal Zadokite priests retired to the wilderness of Judea. A less reputable branch of the family kept the old name of Zadokites but were plain time-servers of the Seleucid Greeks. It was then that pious laymen decided to make the Law truly the inheritance of Jacob (cf. Deut. 33 :4). When Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated the Temple the loyal Maccabean family raised the standard of revolt. Onias IV, son of Onias III High Priest murdered in 180 hoped to see himself and his family regain the High priesthood. But the Maccabees kept this for themselves and Onias IV went to Leontopolis where he had a temple which survived till destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. after the Jerusalem Temple. The Zadokite priests from the Return, though superior to their Hasmonaean and Sadducaean successors did not fulfil the requirements of the exilic prophecies which promised the restoration of a Davidic King. The longer hope was deferred, the less likely of fulfilment it grew, but attracted to itself the longings of the tiny subject people for a deliverer from their troubles. The hope for a deliverer remained constant, but the troubles from which they hoped to be delivered changed with the centuries. The more deferred His arrival, the more wonderful the Messiah or Anointed King would be when He came. The Law and the prophets were searched for signs as to His appearance and character. The Maccabean Kings being fallible men could not match up to the concept of what the Messiah should be and a Davidic Messiah at that. The Pharisees, the godly Bible readers that separated off from the Hasmonaeans after they showed that they intended to claim both kingship and high priesthood, had adopted the new belief in the Resurrection. The Messianic hope, so long deferred, became affected by the belief in the Resurrection; instead of a plain deliverer of Davidic stock, introducing a new era of freedom here and now on a great Day (or battle) of the Lord, came the day of the Lord, moved to the end of time and associated with a general resurrection. But

HOPES OF DELIVERANCE BASED ON THE EXODUS

55

there is a conservatism in religions which leads at the most to the subordinating of other ideas but not to their jettisoning. While some still believed in a Messianic Age in this world, and others in a world to come, there eventually arose a general complete schematisation which saw the early Messianic new kingdom of David's descendant as coming in a new age or time period in this world, but succeeded later by another which would usher in the final consummation; thereafter there would be a new Heaven and a new earth. Qetz, the end (cf. Amos 8 :2) became not the Final End, but the end merely of one time period: then Qetz became by a transfer of thought, equivalent to the time period itself. cf. the way in English we can use 'period' as referring to a full stop or to a period of time. The root behind Qetz means to cut off, and then Qetz becomes the thing cut off. For this use of Qetz reference should be made to the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline, col. 1, line 14. The time periods making up the world history vary in number according to different views, sometimes four, cf. Dan. chs. 2 and 7, Enoch ch, 8-9, M. Gen. R. 49 (view of Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai, 1st. century A.D.), or sometimes seven, millennia: six being this world ('olam ha-zeh) the seventh being the 'Olam ha-Ba (the world to come), Enoch 23: T.B. Rosh ha-Shanah 31a: T.B. Sanh. 97a. 1 Whereas the second Targum to Esther says there will be ten, the ninth being the Messianic Kingdom, but in the tenth God alone will rule. The system of World Ages has probably been derived from Zoroastrianism. Above we have mentioned the development of the idea of the Qetz or Time period. We must look at the 'Olam or Age. 'Olam also stands for the world. But there is a real danger of people reading into 'Olam what 'the world' means to them now. 'Olam in the Old Testament means duration, antiquity or futurity. It is doubtful if in Old Testament it had any meaning implying absolutely endless existence through eternity as we mean eternity. ci,i;s: was 'a long time ago', was 'for a long time beginning now and carrying on into an indefinite future.' Ye me 'Olam, cf. Isa. 63 :9, 11 ; Am. 9:11; Mic. 5 :1 & 7 :14; Mal. 3 :4; are days of old. 'Am 'Olam, cf. Isa. 44:7 is ancient people. 'Olam used of the future is likewise, in1 Even working within the system of six millennia, T.B. Sanh. 97a, cf. also T.B. Abodah Zarah 9a, the view could be held that there were three bimillennial periods, the first without the Law, the second under the Law, the third, the troubles before the Messiah came. Remembering the freedom allowed in Haggadic pronouncements, one would be unwise to seek for evidence that any one system and that only was the norm at any one time.

56

PROLEGOMENA

definite, cf. Deut. 15 :17, "ebed 'olam' - slave for ever, meaning during his lifetime, whereas geullath 'olam, Lev. 25 :32 means redemption at any time - whereas harath 'olam, Jer. 20:17 refers to an ever pregnant (womb). 'Olam is used in relation to God, His existence, Isa. 40 :28. ci,i!I' •:ii,N and Deut. 32 :40, ci,i!l'i, ":;)lN •n, His name ci,i!l'i, ·~tt? m Ex. 3 :15, and of His attributes, love, Jer. 31 :3, loving-kindness Isa. 54:8, Ps. 89:2, 138:8, righteousness, Ps. 119: 142. For 'Olam in relation to God's reign, cf. Ex. 15: 18; Ps.10:16,66:7; 92 :9; 146 :10; Jer. 10:10; Mic. 4:7. Whereas in such cases as it is used in relation to God, we have clearly a case of a meaning given to 'Olam which is equivalent to everlasting, yet in Eccles. 3 :11 'eth-ha 'Olam nathan belibbam while it could be interpreted as eternity, it is more likely to mean as B.D.B. 'Age' (duration) of the world and then passes to the meaning of world per seas over again eternity. The later Hebrew in giving 'olam the meaning of world probably did this after reducing the length of duration covered by 'olam to mean only age - this age, the world. This may have led to the use of the so-called plural of intensity, but it seems to the present writer that Isa. 45:17, Dn. 9 :24, Isa. 26 :4, Ps. 145 :13 could refer to ages, cf. especially Ps. 145 :13 where malkuth kal 'olamim A.V. an everlasting kingdom, is parallel to all generations. Ps. 115 :18 and 121 :8 as B.D.B. points out, with me'attah wee'ad 'olam - 'from now and for ever' (R.S.V. This time forth and for evermore) means as long as one lives. In New Testament Greek 'aion' has the significance of period of time, cf. Ephes. 3 :5, 'which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.' (A.V.) 'Aion' is also used of this present evil world (aion) Gal. 1 :4, cf. also Eph. 1 :21, and of the world to come - e.g. Heb. 6 :5, (A.V.) 'and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world (aion) to come.' In this it reminds one of the post-Biblical Hebrew use of 'Olam and 'Olam ha-Ba (the world to come). In Heb. 1 :2 (God) has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom He made the worlds (aions, i.e. ages). This does not refer to creation of worlds, but time periods; no more than in Isa. 26 :4 does 'olamim refer to worlds. There it is said that God is the rock of Ages. (In Isa. 26 :4 A.V. wrongly translated 'everlasting strength'). God as the Rock of Ages is the abiding element of the different ages. The LXX goes further and implies that at a certain aion He will assert Himself. Ps. 145:13 puts it another way-'Thy Kingdom is an

HOPES OF DELIVERANCE BASED ON THE EXODUS

57

everlasting kingdom and thy dominion endures throughout all generations,' i.e. God is over all the ages. The New Testament - Eph. 2:2, Luke. 16:8, Matt. 13:22, II Cor. 4:4 sees the world, this age, as under the prince of darkness, e.g. Luke 16 :8 - 'the sons of this world (aion) are wiser in their own generation than the sons of light' - Matt. 13 :22 'but the cares of the world (aion), and the delight in riches, choke the word, and it proves unfruitful.' II Cor. 4:4 'In their case the god of this world (aion) has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God.' Here the 'god of this world' reminds us of the Prince of Darkness of the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline; so too Luke 16 :8 with its contrasting of the children of this world (aion) with the children of light seems to suggest, if we can compare with the Dead Sea Manual of Discipline's two camps also on earth, one the Children of Darkness in the ascendant in this aion, and the other the Children of Light. Ephes. 2:2 - 'In which (sins) you once walked, following the course of this world (aion), following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience' should be compared with the D.S.D. for what effect 'the prince of the power of the air' like the angel of perversity has on men. With regard to 'Aion' like 'Olam, continuance is the prominent thought; so 'ages of ages' (ton aion) in the New Testament like me'olam 'ad 'olam perhaps came to mean continuous succession of vast cycles, and to stand for eternity. But in the case of 'olam it is a secondary development. It is in fact doubtful if Rabbinic Judaism at least post 70 A.D. with its sober concern for providing a way of life based on the Law, could ever have lost confidence in ha-'Olam ha-Zeh so as to admit that it was not God's world or age even now. For normative Judaism, 'Olam was this world, and 'Olam ha-Ba the hereafter, the life after death. Rabbinic Judaism, having the Law, the Godgiven prophylactic against the demons was an optimistic religion. The more temptaticns, the more pitfalls, the more Law, and in that salvation was felt to lie. But early normative Judaism knew only too well that here and now God's Law was not observed by all Israel, and that the Kingdom of the World represented by the Roman empire claimed this world; but the Jews never denied that God ruled here and now in the 'Olam ha-zeh in this age or world, though His dominion was not recognised. Immediately after the Exodus and the crossing of the Sea, Moses

58

PROLEGOMENA

had declared Ex. 15 :18, 'The Lord will reign for ever and ever.' Whether 'Olam here was later interpreted as dcuv or not, makes no difference. God's reign for the Jew is a continuous fact. In ancient Israel of the period of the Judges, we see the move beginning in the time of Gideon and Abimelech (cf. Judg. 9 :6) and culminating in the judgeship of Samuel, for the nation to have a king as the other nations. (cf. 1 Sam. 8:6 and 8:20 and 12:12). Gideon had refused (Judg. 8:23) - "'the Lord will rule over you."' Samuel (cf. I Sam 8:5) had been reluctant, but God had apparently agreed to the request, assuring Samuel (I Sam. 8 :7) 'they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me, from being king over them.' After a false start with Saul, the Israelite monarchy was established under David and his successors who acted as agents of God. With the Babylonian Exile the Davidic Kingdom went for ever, but the hope of its renewal did not perish. The Davidic King when enthroned had been God's Son. The Messiah, His anointed Davidic hoped-for successor may likewise in a similar fashion have been regarded as God's Son. Was not Israel the eponymous ancestor - God's son, and also the nation Israel God's sons. In fact the ordinary Israelite was God's son because of being one of Israel. In the Messianic thought, sonship of God was not necessarily stressed, but presumably taken for granted. However, after Christian claims for Messiah Jesus to be Son of God - in fact the on(y Son, this aspect of the Messiah's relationship to God would be dropped even by those who may otherwise have stressed it. When the Davidic Kingdom came to an end in 586 B.C. it was but a rump of its former glory. The Kingdom over all Israel had been shortlived, only the reigns of David and Solomon; but the prophets of the divided kingdoms had had a concern for both parts of Israel (Ephraim and Judah). After northern Israel went into captivity in 721 B.C. the prophets of Judah were all the more interested in the restoration and union of all Israel, as the Kingdom of God. But the concept of God's Kingdom, while having a strictly Israelite national aspect, was influenced by the deeper comprehension of the full implications of monotheism. Amos had seen God as the God who works behind the looms of history, who not only brought Israel up from Egypt (Amos 9 :7) but the Philistines from Caphtor; but the gods of the other nations were somewhat more than no-gods, and the earth and its fulness was hardly yet the Lord's when Amos could threaten Amaziah High Priest of Bethel with the awful threat of exile to a land unclean (Amos 7:17) where Yahweh's writ would not run. It might be that it was possible to be a thorough-

HOPES OF DELIVERANCE BASED ON THE EXODUS

59

going monotheist and yet hold to an older nationalistic conception of God and the boundaries of His influence because of one's own patriotic and nationalistic beliefs. Judaism, the daughter of the old Israelite religion did not find it easy to shake them off, rightly conscious as she was of her election as God's chosen instrument. Early Christianity too, only after a struggle saw the full implications of the teaching of Jesus regarding the Fatherhood of God: if He is the one God He must be the Father of all men. But national churches especially in time of war have not remembered this. Ezekiel's chariot vision which was to be so important for the later Merkabah and Son of Man mysticism, primarily taught two revolutionary truths: a) that God's Shekhinah could be present with His prophet and people in a land impure and b) that God was withdrawing His Shekhinah from the Jerusalem Temple because of the iniquities of those there, and that He had left it before it fell to the Babylonians. Jeremiah had already indicated in his teaching (Jet. 24:4-7) about the good and the bad figs, that the people carried into Exile were the best and the hope oflsrael and that God would be with them. Ezekiel goes further: the miqdash qatan (Ezek. 11 :16) where God was, was outside the land of promise during the Exile. God as it were, voluntarily exiled Himself with His people. While Ezekiel did look for the return of the Shekhinah to the restored Temple the centre of a restored and reunited Israel, Ezekiel's Zadokite Manifesto (Ezek. chs. 40-48) was never put into effect, and those who treasured the words of Ezekiel or those later who utilised his teaching, e.g. the Dead Sea Zadokite Document, would not regard the Shekhinah as ever having returned to the Temple. The Rabbinic Rabbis, though the Temple and its sacrificial service duly carried out by the priests was essential to the proper worship of God1, admitted that the Shekhinah was not in the 1 That the Rabbis felt this lack is illustrated by Rabbi Eleazar's saying in the 2nd. century: 'Since the Temple was destroyed, an iron wall has been interposed between Israel and their Father who is in Heaven; for it is said (Ezek. 4:3) 'And take an iron plate, and place it as an iron wall between you and the city.' T.B. Ber. 32b. Of a similar tenor is T.B. Ber. 59a: 'Since the Temple was destroyed, the firmament has not been seen in its former purity, for it is said (Isa. 50 :3) 'I clothe the heavens with blackness, and make their covering a sack.' To read was as good as to do (cf. above on saying and doing). Rab Jacob bar Aha recorded that Rab Assi had said: 'But for the recital of the sacrificial ordinances, heaven and earth could not exist: for it is said: "O Lord God, how am I to know that I am to possess it (Gen. 15 :8) ?" Namely, Abraham had pleaded peradventure Israel will sin before you, and You will deal with them as with the generations of the Flood and the confusion of tongues. God replied: 'No'. Abraham said: "Let me know whereby I shall inherit it." "Bring me," was the reply, "a heifer three

60

PROLEGOMENA

second Temple. In fact cf. T.B. Yoma 21b, other things were missing too. Why is it that the word i:::i~Ni, and I will be glorified' (Hag. 1 :8) is without the letter i1, whilst another reading has it? It intimates the absence of five things (five being the numerical value of i1), from the second Temple, which existed in the first; viz. 1) The Ark, the Mercy Seat, and the Cherubim; 2) The fire from heaven upon the altar; 3) The visible Presence; 4) The Holy Spirit (of prophecy, Rashi); 5) The Urim and Thummim. And yet this was not the only opinion, much as the Temple worship was important for first century Judaism, the Rabbinic Jews with synagogue worship knew that God's presence could be there. The synagogue, the qehillath Yisrael, the gathering, the assembly for worship and not the building, goes back to the Exile and the Miqdash Qatan of Ezekiel, and so the Rabbis were indebted to Ezekiel, though some tried to exclude his book from the Canon (cf. T.B. Hag. 13a). In T.B. Yoma 57a we read: 'A certain Sadducee (a member of the Zadokites of Qumran, surely not a Sadducee of the Jerusalem Temple) remarked to Rabbi Hanina: "Now surely (that the Temple is no more, and you cannot be purified from your ceremonial uncleanness), you are defiled land, therefore, God no longer dwells with you; for it is written, Lam. 1 :9- 'Her uncleanness is (abides) in her skirts."' He replied: Come and see what is written concerning them (the Jews, Lev. 16:16). 'Who (God) remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness', i.e. even when they are unclean the Shekhinah rests among them.' But Ezekiel in his picture of the restoration with Temple properly served by Zadokite priests, who made atonement for the sin of the land and its impurity so that the Shekhinah could fittingly dwell there, did not think of God's rule or that of His accredited agent, the Davidic Nasi or prince, extending beyond the area of Israel. He did not think of the gentiles as under God's sway. Second Isaiah and the author of the Servant Songs did envisage this, if the latter is indeed different from the Second Isaiah, in Isa. 49 :6 - 'He (God) says, "It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel; years old, and a she-goat of three years old," (i.e. through the atoning efficacy of sacrifice Abraham and his seed should inherit it.) "Lord of the Universe", again pleaded Abraham, "that can only be when the Temple is in existence; what shall come of them (Israel) when the Temple does not exist any more?" God replied: "I have appointed for them the order of sacrifices; read it before Me, I shall consider, as if they offer the sacrifices, and I will forgive them all their iniquities. (T.B. Taanith 27b)

HOPES OF DELIVERANCE BASED ON THE EXODUS

61

I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth."' The rest of the same chapter (49 :7-26) probably from the Second Isaiah, replete with national feeling depicts the return to Zion. It is ari expansion of the first part of v.6, and there is no development of the second part, of being a light to the Gentiles. And yet how in the context could Israel be a light to the Gentiles unless it was restored, unless the kings of the earth saw the lowly captives exalted. V .23: '"Kings shall be your foster fathers, and their queens your nursing mothers. With their faces to the ground, they shall bow down to you, and lick the dust of your feet. Then you will know that I am the Lord; those who wait for me shall not be put to shame."' may seem to be too fulsome: we must remember that it was an oriental poetic oracle. After having been themselves abased and ground down in the Exile, Israel would be exalted. The figures of speech used, describe what they had been subjected to in Exile; the roles could be reversed and they demand similar behaviour towards themselves. Not that they did. But a reversal of fortune, says the prophet, would be dramatic, so dramatic that these very kings (Isa. 52:15) would shut their mouths with surprise and it would penetrate even their dull consciousnesses that something stupendous had happened, and that it was God who had acted on behalf of His people. And not only so but that all along, unbeknown to them, unseen, unappreciated, nay despised and rejected of all men, the martyr nation had been suffering not for her own sins, but for the sins of the other nations. Israel's quiet confidence in God even in the apparent rejection by her God, and her unjust harsh treatment by her Gentile overlords had been vicarious suffering on behalf of her very oppressors. Her erstwhile oppressors, realising this, would now be convinced of their sins, (Isa. 53 :6). 'All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.' It was only justice that Israel shall 'prolong his days', and 'the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand' (Isa. 53 :10). It is amazing that from the Jewish captives in Babylon a poet should arise and not only preach hope for restoration, but willingly see the sufferings of his people as not something to be endured, but something which his people, or at least the righteous remnant among them should take on themselves, not as works of merit for themselves, but as atoning for the sins of the very people who were affiicting the Jews. Such harsh overlords would not realise what those they oppressed were doing for them, unless they saw their captives dramatically restored to

62

PROLEGOMENA

freedom in their own land. Then they would realise they had not been abandoned by their God. The Jewish remnant asked no exaction of an equivalent sum of money from their oppressors as had been inflicted on themselves. All they expected was that the late oppressors would recognise that God was the God of all, and as their oppressors owed fealty to Him, were judged by Him, the Jewish Exiles had suffered for them the consequences of their oppressors's sins. This most astounding doctrine was but the thinking through of the implications of monotheism and the responsibility on behalf of all other men that Israel as the nation chosen by God shouldered, with relation to the rest of mankind. Even though later Judaism did not always remember Isaiah 53 and the function of the suffering servant actively to spread the knowledge of the One Lord to mankind, she acted as guardian of the oracles of God and of His worship, and whether consciously or not has witnessed yea in her blood down the ages that God is the one and only God. The story of St. Francis and his remarks to the young monk who asked him after they had walked through the town without saying a word, although they had gone out to preach, should be recalled again. One's conduct can be preaching as much as words. Torah did go forth from Zion and still does. Torah is not just the Pentateuch nor even the Bible; it embraces sound wisdom, learning and science, and Jews throughout the ages as still today in all fields serve their fellowmen. The Christian Church, with the commission of her Master to preach the Gospel to all men has herself been slack in her missionary activity. Whereas modern critical scholars would not accept unity of authorship for the Book of Isaiah nor see it as all belonging to one period, we should recognise that whatever the date of the different parts of Isaiah or their different authorship, since the time of Ben Sira, c. 200 B.C. the whole book has been ascribed to Isaiah of Jerusalem of the eigth century B.C. This means that during New Testament and Talmudic times all of the book of Isaiah was held to be a unity. That oracles delivered by different hands over 300 years were all seen as belonging to the mid-eighth century B.C. only served to heighten the wonder of the prophet's powers who could give such circumstantial details as to the yet unborn Cyrus and his making possible the return from Babylon. It was only a thousand years or more after Ben Sira that Abraham ibn Ezra and Isaac Abarbanel pointed out the possibility of different sources in Isaiah. Even thereafter the unity of Isaiah was not seriously challenged until the late eighteenth century. It is a

HOPES OF DELIVERANCE BASED ON THE EXODUS

63

mistake to regard Isaiah chs. 1-39 as substantially all written by Isaiah of Jerusalem and the oracles therein, if not the edited work, as belonging to the eighth century B.C. That Isaiah chs. 40-66 is no earlier than the late exilic period is generally accepted, though the case is usually made only for chs. 40-56; chs. 57-66 probably belong to the days of the Return itself, and some even later. It is not just that there were two Isaiahs, the work is that of a school of prophecy which preserved and developed the master's work. Even in I Isaiah 1-39, not all is from the pre-exilic period, e.g. the fall of Babylon, 13:114:23; while the prophecies on Egypt (ch. 20) and Tyre (ch. 23) are post-exilic and as they stand reflect the Greek period, - and chs. 24-27 belong to the rise of Alexander's Empire. But important as it is for critical study of the Old Testament religion of Israel to see the extent of the development of the Isaianic library and to attempt to see what the various prophets in this collection sought to say to their own day and age, this does not help us to understand what a first century Christian made oflsaiah's prophecies, nor what Jesus and His apostles made of it. This is not a plea against Old Testament criticism. It is merely suggesting that a criticism which seeks to understand the original meaning of an Old Testament book must remember that writings like Old Testament books which have been regarded as sacred by Jews and Christians alike have had a history of interpretation influenced by their respective approach at different ages to that book. These interpretations, though they may be further from the original sense meant by the first authors than the modern critical views, and though they may be influenced by comparison with other and quite unrelated oracles lumped with them in the same book resulting in even further distortion of the original meaning, have undoubtedly a secondary but nevertheless real importance in the study of the influence of the book concerned. The New Testament application of passages in Isaiah may not be according to the original plain sense of the writers, but represents a view, nay a fact which cannot be discarded, but is to be studied for itself as the New Testament understanding of the passages of Isaiah. The Rabbis placed Isaiah next in greatness to Moses. T.B. Mak. 24a, would say he surpassed Moses in reducing the commandments to two, justice and charity. The Rabbis remarked on the note of consolation in Isaiah; whereas Moses had said: (Lev. 26 :38) '"And you shall perish among the nations",' Isaiah ann.ounced deliverance. But Isaiah also spoke with an Apocalyptic note - cf. ch. 24:19,

64

PROLEGOMENA

'The earth is utterly broken, the earth is rent asunder, the earth is violently shaken.' v.21. 'On that day the Lord will punish the host of heaven, in heaven, and the kings of the earth, on the earth.' In v.22 they are to be shut up in a pit as prison until the time when they are punished. (Then cf. v.23), the sun and moon will be confounded and the Lord of hosts will reign on Mount Zion, and before the elders of His people manifest His glory. This too was as important as the passages (cf. Isa. 40 :3-5) of encouragement and comfort telling of the hoped-for return, or Isa. 53 and the suffering servant. In fact these other passages had to be understood in the light of such as Isa. 24.

CHAPTER SIX

THE TARGUM OF ISAIAH 53 AND THE MESSIAH The predictions of Second Isaiah and even Third Isaiah were but very partially fulfilled in the events of the Return and the centuries thereafter. Given the belief in the necessity of the prophetic Word once uttered carrying on until it was fulfilled, unfulfilled prophecies are just those very prophecies which engaged the attention of the Jews in the intertestamental period. The prophecy stands, but perhaps the interpretation of it has to be changed. This brings us into the period of the Midrashic activity. But every translation is in the nature of an interpretation. The Targums at first Oral and then written down varied from literal translations to Midrashic haggadic versions of the contents of the Biblical book. We see that if we compare Targum Onkelos on the Pentateuch which is fairly literal, with Targum Jerushalmi which includes much midrashic haggadic material. The Greek translations as Fraenkel pointed out were in the nature of Greek Targums. This penetrating view was in recent times revived and developed by Prof. P. E. Kahle. The LXX, Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion do not specifically introduce a Messianic interpretation but either had different Hebrew texts before them from the M.T. or allowed their translations to be influenced by their preconceptions. There is evidence in the Dead Sea Isaiah MSS and the Greek versions that the Hebrew text of Isa. 53 had been worked over here and there to provide supports or justification for midrashic developments. R.S.V. Isa. 53 :4, 'Surely he has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.' LXX Isa. 53:4,1 'This man carries our sins, and is pained for us, and we thought that he was in labour, and in a plague and in affliction.' Symmachus: 'Surely he took up our sins, and endured our labours; but we thought him to be under the touch (of leprosy) (Aquila 'touched', Theodotion 'beaten') plagued by God ('by God' also in Aquila and Theodotion), and humiliated.' The Greek versions stress further the vicarious nature of the Servant's suffering and define the burden as 'sin'. Symmachus with 1 For translations of LXX, Aquila, Symmachus and Targum Jonathan we follow S. R. Driver & Ad. Neubauer in 'The Jewish Interpreters on Isaiah LIII', Parker, Oxford 1877, pp. 1-3, 5-6.

66

PROLEGOMENA

the mention of the touch (of leprosy) is merely giving a meaning which is implicit in the Hebrew and which afterwards appears in one of the Rabbinic views as to the name of the Messiah, cf. the Baraita (i.e. an extra-Mishnaic but Tannaitic saying). The Rabbis say: His name (Messiah's) is the leper of the house of Rabbi; for it is said (Isa. 53 :4) 'Surely he has borne our sickness, and endured the burden (':i:io) of our pains; yet we did esteem him stricken (with leprosy) smitten of God, and affiicted', (cf. T.B. Sanh. Sa). Continuing with Isa. 53 in verse 6, R.S.V. 'And the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.' LXX - 'And the Lord delivered him over to our sins.' Symmachus - 'And the Lord made the iniquity of us all to meet upon him.' Isa. 53 :8, R.S.V. - 'By oppression and judgmenthewastakenaway; andasforhis generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people?' A.V. - 'He was taken from prison and from judgment; and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.' LXX - 'In his humiliation his judgment was taken away - his generation who shall declare? because his life is taken from the earth, for the iniquities of my people he was led off to death.' Symmachus answers the question posed by the first part of the sentence, differently. 'For he was cut off out of the land of the living, and for the injustice of my people there was a plague upon them.' Theodotion has 'because he was cut off from the land of the living, on account of the defection of my people he touched them.' Isa. 53:10, R.S.V., 'Yet it was the will of the Lord to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when he makes himself an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.' A. V. 'Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief; when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed; he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand' LXX, Isa. 53:10-11, 'And the Lord desires to purify him (Symmachus - to have mercy on him) from his plague (Symmachus - in his wounding); if you give (an offering) for sin, your (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion - his) soul shall see a long-lived seed. The Lord also desires (Aquila and Theodotion insert: - by his hand) to take away (Symmachus - instead of this part of the sentence has 'the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand') from the labour of his soul, to show him light and form (him) with intelligence, (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion have in-

THE TARGUM OF ISAIAH

53

AND THE MESSIAH

67

stead - 'he shall see, shall be filled (Symmachus 'satiated') in his knowledge', to justify the just that serves many well (Symmachus 'that ministers to many'). And their sins (Symmachus -impieties) 'he will bear' (Aquila - shall carry; Symmachus - shall take up; Theodotion - took up). Isa. 53 :12, R.S.V. 'Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.' LXX 53:12 'Therefore shall he have many for his inheritance, and shall divide the spoils (Aquila - booty) of the strong; because his soul was delivered over to death, and he was numbered (Aquila, Symmachus - was counted) amongst the transgressors (Theodotion - held aloof from the impious) and because he bore (Aquila - took away, Symmachus and Theodotion - took on him) the sins of many, and for their transgressions was delivered up' (Symmachus - resisted the disobedient). Could it be that a) Symmachus understands Isa. 53 :8 as referring to the Exile? Exile outside of the land was no (real) life. b) Symmachus by his interpretations (or readings) at the beginning of v.9 and at the end of v.12 it is not clear that the suffering servant really died. In v.9 LXX reads 'for the iniquities of my people he was led off to death (Symmachus - to sacrifice). The Greek versions could understand Isa. 53 as still referring to the nation Israel under the figure of the individual servant. Targum Jonathan to Isa. 52: 13-53 :2 is specifically Messianic. Isa. 52 :13 'Behold my servant Messiah shall prosper; he shall be high, and increase, and be exceeding strong; as the house of Israel looked to him during many days because their countenance was darkened among the peoples, and their complexion beyond the sons of men, so will he scatter many peoples; at him kings shall be silent, and put their hands upon their mouth, because that which was not told them have they seen, and that which they had not heard that they have observed. Isa. 53: 1) Who has believed this our glad tidings? and the strength of the mighty arm of the Lord, upon whom as thus has it been revealed? 2) The righteous will grow up before him, yea, like blooming shoots, and like a tree which sends forth its roots to streams of water, cf. Ezek. 31 :3, will they increase - a holy generation in the land that was in need of him; his countenance no profane countenance, and the Studia Post-Biblica

VIII

6

68

PROLEGOMENA

terror at him not the terror at an ordinary man; his complexion shall be a holy complexion, and all who see him will look wistfully at him. 3) Then he will become despised, and will cut of the glory of all the kingdoms; they will be prostrate and mourning, like a man in pains and like one destined for sicknesses; and as though the presence of the Shekhinah had been withdrawn from us, they will be despised, and esteemed not. 4) Then for our sins he will pray, and our iniquities will for his sake be forgiven, although we were accounted stricken, smitten from before the Lord, and afflicted. 5) But he will build up the Holy Place, which has been polluted for our sins, and delivered to the enemy for our iniquities; and by his instruction peace shall be increased upon us, and by devotion to his words, our sins will be forgiven us. 6) All we like sheep have been scattered, we had each wandered off on his own way; but it was the Lord's good pleasure to forgive the sins of all of us for his sake. 7) He prayed, and he was answered, and ere he had opened his mouth he was accepted; the mighty of the people he will deliver up like a sheep to the slaughter and like a lamb dumb before her shearers; there shall be none before him opening his mouth or saying a word. 8) Out of chastisement and punishment he will bring our captives near; the wondrous things done to us in his days who shall be able to tell? for he will cause the dominion of the Gentiles to pass away from the land of Israel, and transfer to them the sins which my people have committed. 9) He will deliver the wicked into Gehinnom, and those that are rich in possessions into the death of utter destruction, in order that those that commit sin may not be established, nor speak deceits with their mouth. 10) But it is the Lord's good pleasure to try and purify the remnant of his people, so as to cleanse their souls from sin; these shall look on the kingdom of their Messiah; their sons and their daughters shall be multiplied, they shall prolong their days, and those who perform the Law shall prosper in his good pleasure. 11) From the subjection of the nations he will deliver their souls, they shall look upon the punishment of those that hate them, and be satisfied with the spoil of their kings; by his wisdom he will hold the guiltless free from guilt, in order to bring many into subjection to the Law; and for their sins he will intercede. 12) Then will I divide for him the spoil of many peoples, and the possessions of strong cities shall he divide as prey, because he delivered up his soul to death, and made the rebellious subject to the Law; he shall intercede for many sins, and the rebellious for his sake be forgiven.' The Targum is a very significant Midrash showing how its authors

THE TARGUM OF ISAIAH

53

AND THE MESSIAH

69

understood Isa. 53. There is a strong nationalist element in the Targum's interpretation of Isa. 52:13-53:12. Whereas in the Hebrew original Isa. 53: 1-10 contains the testimony of the Gentile Kings and nations to the suffering Servant, not so in the Targum - 'our sins' in v.4 are the sins of the Israelite Community that is testifying to the Messiah, God's Servant, who is no inconspicuous plant in dry ground, but a veritable tree planted by waters which recalls Ezekiel's metaphor of mighty Assyria - Ezek. 31 :3,4f. Instead of Isaiah's picture of the servant lacking comeliness and beauty the Targumist depicts his countenance like that of Moses, and tells us 'his countenance (was) no profane countenance, and the terror at him, not the terror at an ordinary man; his complexion shall be a holy complexion 'etc. The Targumist does follow briefly the original Hebrew in allowing that the servant will be despised, but it would appear that the result of this is the taking away of the glory of all the Kingdoms, whether of the world or the two kingdoms of Israel. It may be the latter as their condition will appear as if 'the Shekhinah had been withdrawn from us.' (Israel) His 'Bearing our griefs' in v.4 becomes 'Then for our (Israel's) sin he will pray,' again like Moses. The Targumist goes further than the Hebrew text in showing that his intercession is successful. 'Our iniquities will for his sake be forgiven.' Most noteworthy is that in rendering what follows, it is not he but we who were accounted stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. One might go too far in pressing the significance of this alteration, for after all was not the Servant Israel? But was he in the Servant Songs identical with all Israel, though the Servant appears so in II Isaiah in general as equivalent to Israel. Even so the righteous remnant have now become in the Targum separate from the Messiah, and there is a clear break in the self-identification of the Messiah with Israel's griefs and sorrows, not to speak of those of the world, as witnessed by the alteration that the Targumist makes to the very words and sense of Isa. 53 :3,4. In v.5. - 'But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities' becomes in the Targum - 'But he will build up the Holy Place, which has been polluted for our sins, and delivered to the enemy for our iniquities.' The Messiah of the Targumist cannot suffer, can11ot even appear to be defeated. The reference to the Holy Place, the Temple, shows how important and central a place the Temple held in the Targumist's Judaism. Could it be that he is contrasting his Messiah with Jes us who prophesied against the Temple while it was still standing.

70

PROLEGOMENA

The Targumist does not allow that his Messiah suffered vicariously. 'The chastisement of our peace was upon him' becomes 'by his instruction' (another meaning of the same Hebrew word underlying "chastisement") peace shall be increased upon us, and by devotion to his words, our sins will be forgiven us.' Earlier in v.4. (cf. also v.6), it was by his merit that God forgave Israel, now it is by devotion to his words that their sins are forgiven. This again reminds one of Moses, and the Law. But in v.6, the Targum in rendering 'the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all' hastens to assure that the sins are forgiven by God. He does concede 'for his sake,' i.e. the merit of the Messiah, but there is no concession to vicarious suffering. The Targum in v.7 significantly alters 1 the sense of the original in two directions; the reference to the servant being 'oppressed, and afflicted' is altered to 'He prayed and he was answered.' But lest even it be thought that 1 The following are examples of how the Bible Text not only of the Hagiographa and the Prophets, but even of the Torah itself would be altered for Midrashic purposes. 'Whoever studies the Law in the presence of an Am ha-Aretz comes in, as it were, to his espoused in his (the Am ha-Atetz's) presence: fot it is said: (Deut. 33 :4) "Moses commanded us a law, the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob;" read not i1TC.,,~ "inheritance," but ;io-,iN~ = espoused. The hatted which the Am ha-Atetz beat against a disciple of the wise, is gteatet than that which idolaters conceive against Israel. That of theit wives is still more implacable; and that of a disciple, who has deserted the tanks, exceeds that of all combined." T.B. Pes. 49b. Rabbi Simeon hen Lakish said: 'Whoever answers Amen during prayers with all his might, to him the gates of the garden of Eden ate opened: as it is said (Isa. 26 :2) "Open the gates, that the righteous nation which keeps faith may entet in." Read not t:l'l,~N .,~TC 'that keeps faith', but T~N c·.,~iNTC = 'who say Amen.' (T.B. Shab.119b.) "Far be it from thee to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked." (Gen. 18 :25) But why not? Is it not written (Ezek. 21 :9) "Because I will cut off from you both righteous and wicked?" (Answer) This means only the imperfectly righteous. But is it not written (Ezek. 9 :6) "And begin at my sanctuary" where Rab Joseph said: "Read not '!Cip~~. 'and from my sanctuary' but 'TL'iip~~ = 'from my sanctified ones,' " i.e. those who have fulfilled the Law from Aleph to Taw?" (Answer) These also failed to check the wickedness around them, and were, therefore, imperfectly righteous; (T.B. Abodah Zarah 4a). Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said: "At evety utterance, which proceeded from the mouth of the Holy One, Blessed be He! on Mount Sinai, Israel receded twelve miles, when the ministering angels moved them gently back, fot it is said (Ps. 68 :13): 'The angels ('::lN 1m and not •::i':i~ kings) of hosts kept moving.' Read not tiiii• as if (intransitive) but tiii' (transitive) (T.B. Shah. 88b). What is written (Song of Songs 1 :3) 'The odout of your ointments'? Why is a disciple of the wise likened to a bottle of ointments? Because, like it, his odour is only emitted when he opens his mouth, and not otherwise; and what is more, hidden things are revealed to him as it is said: "The maidens love you"; read here m~i':i:!7 hidden things (ibid.) More than this, the angel of death loves him; read not m~':i:!7 'maidens', but m~ '?:!7, he that is over death. What is still more, he is heir of both worlds; tead here m~':ii:!7 - worlds.' (T.B. Abodah Zarah, 37b.)

THE TARGUM OF ISAIAH

53

AND THE MESSIAH

71

he had to wrestle in prayer and there was any cry of dereliction, the Targum goes on 'and ere even he had opened his mouth he was accepted,' a closer rendering of 'yet he opened not his mouth' considering how the whole sense of the verse had been altered. Isa. 53,: 7b, 'Brought as a lamb to the slaughter' in the Targum cannot figure as it stands; the Messiah cannot suffer or be defeated, so it is the mighty of the peoples he will deliver up like a sheep to the slaughter and like a lamb dumb before her shearers. 'So he opened not his mouth,' Isa. 53 :7c, cannot stand as referring to the victorious Messiah and in the Targum is applied to the doomed nations. 'There shall be none before him opening his mouth or saying a word', cf. Isa. 52:15, silent but for a different reason. Isa. 53:8 - R.S.V. 'By oppression and judgment he was taken away,' A.V. - 'He was taken from prison and from judgment,' is like the rest of the verse, absolutely reversed as regards sense and reference by the Targumist and becomes, 'Out of chastisement and punishment he will bring captives near.' A.V. - 'And who shall declare his generation?' becomes in the Targum 'the wondrous things done to us in his days who shall be able to tell.' While 'for he was cut off out of the land of the living', in the Targum becomes the action of the Messiah directed against the occupying Gentile Power, i.e. 'for he will cause the dominion of the Gentiles to pass away from the land oflsrael.' A.V. - 'For the transgression of my people was he stricken' becomes, since it is the Gentiles and not the Messiah who is stricken, 'and he (God or the Messiah) will transfer to them the sins which my people have committed'. Instead of a Jewish suffering servant we have here the Gentiles playing the part of vicarious sufferers. Isa. 53 :9 is likewise altered in the Targum in conformity with the victorious Messiah envisaged throughout this chapter by the Targumist. A.V. - 'And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich (R.S.V. a rich man) in his death' becomes 'He, (the Messiah) will deliver the wicked into Gehinnom, and those that are rich in possessions into the death of utter destruction.' Already this shift in emphasis, at least as far as this verse is concerned: 'soul and be satisfied' becomes in the Targum 'from the subjection of the nations he (the Messiah) will deliver their souls (i.e. of Israel), they shall look upon the punishment of those that hate them, and be satisfied with the spoil of kings.' A.V. - 'By his knowledge shall my righteous servant (R.S.V. the righteous one, my servant), justify many' significantly becomes in the Targum 'by his wisdom he will hold the guiltless free from guilt, in

72

PROLEGOMENA

order to bring many into subjection to the Law. Far from being opposed to the (Mosaic) Law, (Written and Oral) that the Messiah will be able to give proper halakhic decisions, show the reasonableness of the Law, what it requires and what it does not, and as a result people will accept the Law as the rule of life seems to be the idea lying behind this. 'For he will bear their iniquities' becomes 'and for their sins he will intercede.' The thought of vicarious suffering is allowed, but the Messiah, because of his merit is efficacious in prayer as was Moses the Lawgiver, and many of the Hasidim. The Targum could be said to be emphasising throughout, in its reference to prayer by the Messiah that this is his spiritual ministry, and it is significant that Isa. 53 :12 does end with 'made intercession for the transgressors.' Isa. 53 :12 'Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors,' becomes in the Targum 'then I will divide for him the spoil of many peoples, and the possessions of strong cities shall he divide as prey, because he delivered up his soul to death, and made the rebellious subject to the Law.' 'Because he delivered up his soul to death' cannot mean the same as the Hebrew original that the Servant died, but rather that he risked death in coping with many peoples, and strong cities; or it might mean that the life of the individual peoples or cities was delivered up to death, and the Messiah has his share of their erstwhile possessions. The Messiah's close relation to the Law is again emphasised. The aim of the Messianic age would appear to make the rebellious subject to the (Mosaic) Law. Whether the rebellious are those in Israel, the Am ha-Aretz or the Gentile world is uncertain; if it were the latter, the final phrase, would be the only part of Isa. 53 in the Targum which showed any concern for the world beyond Israel. 'And he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors' Isa. 53 :12b becomes in the Targum 'he shall intercede for many sins, and the rebellious for his sake be forgiven.' Again vicarious suffering is carefully excluded. The intercession could be by prayer or sacrifice, but the significant thing is that we have in the Targum not the 'sin of many' but 'many sins'. It is not clear whose sins they were, just as it is not clear who the rebellious are who are forgiven for the sake (or by the merits) of the Messiah. The chances are that the rebellious are the Law-breakers, and the sins he intercedes for are the sins against the Law, for Messiah's reign is here the reign of the Law. That this is so, and reflects the view of Rabbinic Judaism in the

THE TARGUM OF ISAIAH

53

AND THE MESSIAH

73

main is R. Yonah's saying - "It is written, 'I will allot him a portion with the many"'; Isa. 53 :12a, this refers to R.Akiba, who introduced the study of the Midrash, the Halakhoth, T.B. Shekalim 51. But the Rabbis knew also of a dying Messiah, cf. T.B. Sukkah 52a -Our Rabbis have taught (sign of a Baraita or extra Mishnaic Tannaitic Teaching): The Holy One, Blessed be He! will say to Messiah, the son of David, May he be speedily revealed in our own days! 'Ask of me, and I will give you, as it is said: "I will tell of the decree of the Lord: - Today I have begotten you. "Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage." (Ps.2:7,8). But knowing that Messiah ben Joseph was slain, he will say: 'I desire nothing of you but life.' That, will sound the reply, thy father David prophecied concerning thee long ago; as it is said - Ps. 21 :5, 'He asked life of thee; thou gavest it to him.' The violent death of the Messiah, the son of Joseph, is again referred to in T.B. Sukkah 52a. 'And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their women apart' (Zech. 12:12). Have we not here a lesson, a fortiori? If in the time of the Messiah on an occasion of mourning, and when the 'evil imagination' has no more dominion, the Law (Zechariah) says: 'Men apart and women apart', how much more should men and women be apart now, when the 'evil Imagination' has dominion, and on occasions of mirth? What was the cause of the mourning? Rabbi Dosa (first century A.D.) said: 'The violent death of Messiah, the son of Joseph.' The Rabbis said: 'the destruction of the evil imagination.' If (asks someone) the cause will be the violent death of Messiah the son of Joseph, one can understand what is written (Zech. 12:10): 'And they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, cf. John 19:37, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for his only son.' But if the cause will be the destruction of the 'evil imagination,' why should they not rather rejoice? (Answer) That accords with what Rabbi Judah has said: 'In the time of the Messiah, the Holy One, blessed be He! he will bring out the 'evil imagination,' and slay him in the presence of the righteous and the wicked. To the former he will appear like a high mountain; to the latter like a hair. Both will weep. The righteous will say: 'How could we surmount such a high mountain?' And the wicked will say: 'How is it that we could not overcome a hair?' And the Holy One, Blessed be He! will also be surprised; as it is said (Zech. 8 :6): 'Thus says the Lord of Hosts, If it is marvellous in the eyes of the remnant of this people, it is also marvellous in my eyes.' Rab Assi

74

PROLEGOMENA

said: 'At first the 'evil imagination' appears like a wool-thread, and at last like a cart-rope; as it is said, (Isa. 5:18): 'Woe to them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart-rope.' T.B. Sukkah 52a. In this rather rambling Haggadah the main topic is the nature of the 'Evil Imagination', or rather the Yetzer ha-Ra. cf. pp. 49, 50, 51. The Rabbis do not personalise it here. It was sometimes identified by the Rabbis with sexual desire (cf. Gen. R. IX :9). While this would be its conotation in relation to the times of the Messiah (cf. however also Jesus - there is no marriage and giving of marriage in heaven, (Mark 12 :25), cf. T.B. Ber. 17a, cf. also Lev. R. XXVI, where it is stated that the Yetzer ha-Ra belonged only to this world, and does not exist in angels), it is too narrow a connotation and could cover all impulses, some bad in themselves, others that made a man fall short of his better self. The Haggadah is however, of more interest in Rabbi Dosa of the first century, saying that the cause of the mourning mentioned in Zech. 12:12 was the violent death of Messiah the son of Joseph, and then this suggestion being taken up by another speaker that if this were the case, one could understand what is written in Zech. 12:10 - 'And they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him as one mourns for his only son.' Rabbi Dosa is not identifying the Messiah the son of Joseph with Jesus, who was before Dosa's time (80-120), in any case he is speaking of Messiah the son of Joseph as yet to come. But what is significant is the application of Zech. 12:10 to the Messiah, the son of Joseph, since it is applied to Jesus in the New Testament. 1.

THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, I.E.

THE KINGDOM OF GoD AND THE LAw

Both were immutably related in Rabbinic Judaism in the twice daily recitation of the Shema. Deut. 6:4-9, Deut. 11: 13-21, and Num. 15:3741, with the accompanying benedictions, cf. Danby, The Mishnah, p. 2 ftns. 13 and 14, M.Ber. 2:2: R. Joshua b. Karha said: 'Why does the section 'Hear, 0 Israel' precede 'and it shall come to pass if ye shall hearken,' Deut. 11 :13f - 'so that a man may first take upon him the yoke of the kingdom of heaven and afterward take upon him the yoke of the commandments.' The Kingdom of Heaven means the Kingdom of God or the rule

THE TARGUM OF ISAIAH

53

AND THE MESSIAH

75

of God. God rules now. In reciting the Shema's first words - 'Hear 0 Israel, the Lord our God the Lord is one' a Jew twice a day declares the Kingdom of God here and now, and fortified by that declaration can take on himself the yoke of the Law, the constitution of God's Kingdom. M.Ber. 1 :5 is also significant. The going forth from Egypt (Num. 15 :37-41, which mentions the Exodus in the last verse) is rehearsed (also) at night. R. Eleazar b. Azariah said: 'Lo, I am like to one that is 70 years old, yet failed to prove why the going forth from Egypt should be rehearsed at night until Ben Zoma thus expounded it: "It is written, that thou mayest remember the day when thou earnest forth out of the land of Egypt all the days of thy life. (Deut. 16 :3)." 'The days of thy life' (would mean) the days only: but all the days of thy life (means) the nights also. The Sages say: 'The days of thy life' (means) this world only, 'all the days of thy life' is to include the Days of the Messiah'. It might be argued that the days of the Messiah are here thought of as after a second Exodus, and/or that even in the days of the Messiah the Law still holds. Before taking on the yoke of the Law which the second and third sections of the Shema typify (and which allude to the Exodus, cf. Deut. 16:3 and Num. 15 :41) - one declares oneself as accepting the Kingdom of God. One cannot fulfil the demands of the Law without accepting first the Kingdom of God. For the Jew who keeps the Law, the Kingdom exists now. In the future in the days of the Messiah when the Kingdom is clearly manifest, the Law would still hold, so would run the Jewish argument. When Danby translates :im cl:ii:i.i in M.Ber. 1 :5, as 'this world' while 'Olam had come to mean 'this world now', it might be that the Sages were not distinguishing 'this world' from the days of the Messiah in the sense of heaven, but this world as this odwv, this age not this xocrµ.oc:;. If so the Days of the Messiah would not mean heaven but the new age on earth yet to come, which would be a fuller manifestation of the Kingdom of God. We must use the term 'Heaven' with great circumspection. Heaven in the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is not a place, but a rule of Heaven, and Heaven in this phrase is a metonymy for God, beloved of the Rabbis and the writer of Matthew's Gospel. The Rabbis of the Mishnah quite often referred to Ha-Makom, the Place, not in the Old Testament sense as the Sanctuary, the abode of the Shekhinah, but again as a metonymy for God.

76

PROLEGOMENA

2. MIRACLES The reader of the Gospel story from the very first chapter becomes aware of the large part miracles assume in the short accounts of Christ's ministry. In the four gospels 35 miracles are reported - in Mark's Gospel there are 18 miracles, only two of which are not recorded in any other Gospel; four are recorded in one other gospel, eleven in two other gospels, and one in three other gospels. We ought not to be surprised that in Mark's Gospel behind which stands Peter's teaching, we have in this the shortest of the four gospels, slightly more than half the miracles. It is consonant with Peter's preaching as seen in Acts. 2 :22-' "Jes us of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works (dunamesi), and wonders (terasi), and signs (semeiois), which God did through him in your midst."' The LXX uses semeion for Hebrew 0th and teras for Hebrew mopheth (Exod. 7 :3). In the Bible not only is every occurrence which contrasts with the ordinary happenings of life counted a miracle or wonder, but every occurrence in nature is, in the Biblical view, an act of God. He it is who sends the rain and causes the thunder (Job. 37 :4-6). Every work of creation is an act of His Providence (cf. Ps. 104). After the flood God declares (Gen. 8 :22) '"While the earth remains seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease. "'The ancient Israelite professed that creation was at God's word and that the regularity of the seasons, the course of the sun and the moon and the stars were all upheld by God. God was creator and sustainer of all. All existed for His gooJ pleasure, and to serve Him. Note that in Gen. 1 :14 the lights in the firmament of heaven were primarily to divide the day from the night; and to be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years. The religious calendar came first, but in the following verse, Gen. 1 :15, itis said: '"Letthem be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth."' God could use the heavenly bodies for signs, e.g. Jos. 10:10-14, when the sun, moon, stars were stayed in their course to show that God battles for Israel, cf. also Judges 5 :20. Miracles were not breaking the laws of nature in the Biblical view. All things were ordained by God, by His mercy there was orderliness in the course of nature, but He could alter the course of natural events to remind men that the stable order of things existed only by His good will. He could also intervene to protect His chosen people or agents within it.

CHAPTER SEVEN

MIRACLES AND THE EXODUS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH The Pentateuch of all the books of the Old Testament has the greatest number of signs and wonders, the bulk of them relating to events leading to the deliverance and Exodus from Egypt. Next come those relating to the Theophany at Sinai, the wilderness wanderings, and the entry into and establishment of Israel in Canaan. Miracles were not lacking in the accounts of Biblical history before or after this period, when God manifested His punitive judgement against His enemies, and those of His chosen people, e.g. the treatment of Sodom, (Gen. 19 :24f) or of the Assyrians (II Kings 19 :35) or when He protected His chosen, e.g. Isaac on the altar saved by the provision of a ram (Gen. 22:13) or the provision of food in the wilderness for Elijah (I Kings 17 :6). But the miracles, the signs and wonders which stand out as clearly the most significant in the Bible are those wrought by the hands of Moses in delivering his people and leading them out. It is these miracles and not the others that are recalled by prophet and Psalmist of much later times. They show God's punitive judgement on the enemies of Israel, His protection of His chosen people. They declare that God reigns. His chosen minister Moses has by miracle to show his credentials, and this laid down a pattern for prophets of later days. Whereas the Law itself - Deut. 13 :2,3 warns against a prophet or dreamer of dreams who gives a sign or wonder which comes to pass and thereby apparently establishes his credentials, but goes on to urge the people to idolatry. Deut. 13 :4 warns that even though his sign came about he is not to be followed, and explains it as really a test from God to see whether they love the Lord in the words of the Shema. Deut. 13 :5 reiterates 'you shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him, and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him, and cleave to him.' Deut. 18 :21, 22 deal with the question of how may we know the word which the Lord has not spoken? Theanswer-'When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously', must have worried Jeremiah for most

78

PROLEGOMENA

of his ministry. The prophetic word is not necessarily different from a sign. In fact the sign was usually implicit in the word, cf. the signs of Moses. God tells him what to say to Pharaoh and what would happen if Pharaoh would not comply. When he did not comply, the word fulfilled itself in the sign; but the sign would have lost its quality as a sign had it not been for the word. It is worthwhile looking at the signs and wonders relating to the preparation for the Exodus and those of the Exodus itself. This was the great fact in Israelite history, and the model for future deliverance, cf. Isa. 51 :9- "'Awake, awake, put on strength, 0 arm of the Lord; awake, as in days of old, the generations of long ago. Was it not thou that didst cut Rahab in pieces, that didst pierce the dragon?"' There could be reference here to the cosmic struggle which preceded creation, but Egypt was also later called by the Prophets Rahab, and we have therefore a double reference. In short, the Exodus is seen as a continuation of the cosmic struggle which shall only be fully won in Messianic times, cf. Targ. Jerushalmi to Ex. 12 :42 and its Four Nights of Passover; the first night of Passover is at creation; the second is the covenant with Abraham and God's promise to him and his seed; the third is the historical Passover from Egypt, the deliverance of the chosen nation, the instrument of God's scheme of salvation; the fourth of the significant nights of Passover marks the Messiah's coming with Moses from the wilderness on the clouds. It is highly significant that there is an old Jewish belief that Satan is bound on the night of Passover (cf. Jubilees 48:15 and T.B.Pes. 109b). Isa. 51 :10 refers to both the appearance of the dry land out of the sea at creation and the crossing of the Sea of Reeds on dry land at the Exodus. "'Was it not thou that didst dry up the sea, the waters of the great deep? that didst make the depths of the sea a way for the redeemer to pass over?"' Thus Exodus will be the pattern for and assurance of the deliverance from the Babylonian exile; Isa. 51 :11 - '"And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with singing; everlasting joy shall be upon their heads; they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away."' But this was not the final deliverance, as all these hopes were not fulfilled; however since the word of prophecy once spoken must go on to complete fulfilment, this prophecy would be held to provide a picture of the final deliverance; as the canon of the prophets was not so long thereafter completed, it was the turn of the preachers and

THE EXODUS AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH

79

midrashic exegetes to expound and interpret the prophetic oracles, as a source of comfort for their own times and hope for the future. Their interpretation largely altered the original sense of the oracles, which could be sometimes used only as a front for their own ideas and schemes of salvation. The first miracle experienced by Moses was his personal deliverance as an infant from the Nile, but the second which constitutes his call was the appearance of God to him in the Burning Bush nearly eighty years later. The life of Moses in all was 120 years; the incidents from his life which we have in the Pentateuch occupy about three years six months. We see him for a moment as a child; then, for a little season, in his fortieth year before he flees from Egypt to Midian; again, when he has reached eighty, we are his companions for a little over two years: and finally we are permitted to associate with him for the last twelve months of his life. The grandest biography which the Old Testament contains might, when separated from the statute books which it is associated, be comprised in little more than a few pages of an ordinary book. Deliberate principles of selection of events considered as really significant in the life of Moses operated in choosing what is allowed to appear in the Torah. The Burning Bush which was not consumed was itself a miracle which was the Theophany itself. '"I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God oflsaac, and the God of Jacob''' (Ex. 3:6). God announces His intervention in history, but as the God of history - Ex. 3 :15 - 'God also said to Moses, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob has sent me to you': this is my name for ever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations."' Although the word 'covenant' is not mentioned, the name God of Abraham etc. implies the covenants with the patriarchs (cf. Gen. 15:18, 17:2ff with Abraham, Gen. 17:19, 21 with Isaac). Moses after commissioning was to announce to the elders of Israel that God had visited them and seen what was done to Israel in Egypt, and that God had promised the deliverance therefrom. Part of the commission of Moses was also to confront Pharaoh and demand that he let them go. But God sees that Pharaoh will refuse and promises Moses (Ex. 3 :20): '"So I will stretch out my hand and smite Egypt with all the wonders which I will do in it; after that he will let you go."' The wonders and miracles are therefore seen as an integral part of God's programme to effect deliverance from Egyptian bondage. On

80

PROLEGOMENA

Moses' answering God(Ex. 4:1) '"they (Israel) will not believe me or listen to my voice, for they will say, 'The Lord did not appear to you"" -the miracle of the rod turned into a serpent follows (vv.2,3), and also that of Moses' hand turning leprous (vv.5,6). If the people would not believe these signs nor hearken to his words (note signs coming before what Moses would say in support of his message, v.9), Moses is furnished with a third sign (Ex. 4 :9): ' "You shall take some water from the Nile and pour it upon the dry ground; and the water which you shall take from the Nile will become blood upon the dry ground."' Moses excused at last from speaking to Pharaoh on the ground of being slow in speech provided Aaron acts as spokesman, is as he sets off for Egypt charged by God(Ex. 4:21): "'See that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles which I have put in your power."' When Moses and Aaron spoke to Pharaoh (ch. 5) the only result was more stringent conditions for the Israelites in bondage. Moses thereafter speaks to the people telling them of the deliverance and the forthcoming fulfilment of the promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Ex. 6 :9): 'But they did not listen to Moses, because of their broken spirit and their cruel bondage.' Prior to the next interview with Pharaoh God charges Moses (Ex. 7 :9): '"When Pharaoh says to you, 'Prove yourselves by working a miracle', then you shall say to Aaron, 'Take your rod and cast it down before Pharaoh, that it may become a serpent.' " ' Pharaoh countered by telling his wise men and sorcerers to do likewise, which they did (Ex. 7: 12): 'For every man cast down his rod, and they became serpents. But Aaron's rod swallowed up their rods.' God hardened Pharaoh's heart again (cf. Ex. 7:13). The story is told as if God from the beginning had decided to have the occasion for demonstrating His wonders through Moses. The Lord now instructs Moses (Ex. 7 :15£) to waylay Pharaoh as he went for his morning dip in the Nile, and make the request again to let the people go to serve God in the wilderness. Moses is to take with him the wonderworking rod (supplied by God at the Burning Bush - Ex. 4 :17), but it is God who will smite the waters with it and they will be turned to blood and the fish in it stink, and the water be undrinkable (Ex. 7 :18). Moses was only to stretch it over the water (v.19), however (v.20) he smote the water. The miracle took place (Ex. 7 :20). The magicians of Egypt did likewise (Ex. 7 :22) and Pharaoh's heart was hardened and he would not listen. After seven days of the waters of Egypt not fit

THE EXODUS AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH

81

to drink, Moses (7 :26) is now instructed by God to go again to Pharaoh and renew his request: 'Thus says the Lord, "Let my people go, that they may serve me."' If Pharaoh refused, the plague of frogs was to follow. On Pharaoh's refusing Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt and the land was covered with frogs. The magicians managed to copy this miracle, and Pharaoh was unimpressed. But eventually Pharaoh sent for Moses and Aaron, and asked (Ex. 8 :4): '"Entreat the Lord to take away the frogs from me and from my people; andiwillletthe people go to sacrifice to the Lord."' Moses agrees to keep the frogs in the river, '"that you (Pharaoh) may know that there is no one like the Lord our God."' (Ex. 8 :6). This last is the raison d'etre which lies behind the plagues as in Ex. 7 :5, '"And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord."' Moses interceded with God that the frogs be removed and then Pharaoh refused to carry out his promise to let the people go. The third plague followed as Aaron and Moses on command from God stretched out the rod to smite the dust to bring gnats on man and beast. Ex. 8: 13 - 'all the dust of the land became gnats throughout all the land of Egypt.' The magicians were nonplussed - they, despite all the dust being gnats could not produce gnats (v.14)- 'So there were gnats on man and beast.' In v.15 we are told: 'And the magicians said to Pharaoh, "This is the finger of God."' We are not dealing with history in the usual sense, but with a very dramatic account of the events which led up to the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. The story is told for the annual recapturing of the power of the original event as a memorial of the Lord's mighty works at the anniversary of the deliverance from Egypt. This story is part of the Torah that the Jerusalem priests in post-exilic times 1 would have declaimed at the yearly anniversary of the Exodus, just as the present Passover Haggadah is recited and probably has been recited with little change from the early centuries of this era. The present Haggadah shel Pesah does not spend much time on the plagues as such. We cite here its handling of the plagues: '"For I will pass through the land of Egypt (Ex. 12 :12), I myself, and not an angel: and I will smite all the first-born: I myself and no serpent: and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgements I myself and not a messenger: I am the Lord: I am He and no other."' Then the Passover Haggadah gives a midrash on Deut. 26 :8, 'And 1 The Exodus account (Ex. 3-15) composite though it is, either in the J form or the JE was doubtless used by Judean priests long before the Exile.

82

PROLEGOMENA

the Lord brought us out of Egypt, with a mighty hand, and an outstretched arm; with great terror, with signs and wonders.' 'with a mighty hand' - this refers to the murrain; as it is said (Ex. 9 :3) "Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the oxen and upon the sheep, with a grievous murrain." 'And with an outstretched arm': this refers to the sword (of pestilence, by which the first-born were slain); as it is said elsewhere (1 Chron. 21 :16) 'And his sword drawn in his hand was stretched over Jerusalem.' "'And with great terror': this refers to the visible manifestation of the Divine Presence; as it is said, (Deut. 4:34) 'Has any god ever attempted to go and take him a nation for himself from the midst of another nation, by proofs, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, by a mighty hand, by an outstretched arm, and great terrors, according to all that the Lord your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes.''' 'And with signs': this refers to the miracle performed by the rod; as it is said (Ex. 4:17) "'And you shall take in your hand this rod, with which you shall do the signs."' 'And with wonders': this refers to the plague of blood; as it is said (Joel 3:3) - "'And I will give portents in the heavens, and on the earth, blood and fire, and columns of smoke."' Some Rabbis explain this text in another manner, viz. 'with a mighty hand' denotes two plagues. 'And with an outstretched arm:' also two plagues. 'And with great terror': two more plagues. 'And with signs': again two plagues.' And with wonders': the last two plagues. 'These are the ten plagues which the Holy One, blessed be He, brought on the Egyptians in Egypt, viz. blood, frogs, lice, vermin, murrain, boils, hail, locusts, darkness and the slaying of the first-born. 'Rabbi Judah formed of the initials (of the Hebrew words indicating the 10 plagues) three mnemonic words: ':JiiN:J '!Di:si' '1~i 'the scorpion stung the uncle.' Rabbi Joseph the Galilean says, 'whence didst thou deduce that the Egyptians were smitten with ten plagues in Egypt, and upon the sea they were smitten with fifty plagues?' The answer is: In Egypt(Ex. 8 :15) 'the magicians said unto Pharaoh, ,,This is the finger of God"': but at the seaitis said (Ex.14:31) 'And Israel saw the mighty hand wherewith the Lord smote the Egyptians, and the people feared the Lord, and believed in the Lord, and his servant Moses.' With how many plagues were they smitten with the finger? Answer - with ten plagues. Hence it is deducible that if in Egypt

THE EXODUS AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH

83

they were smitten with ten plagues, at the sea they were smitten with fifty plagues. (i.e. if one finger of God = 10 plagues, one hand with five fingers = 50 plagues). 'Rabbi Eleazar saith, "From whence can it be deduced that every plague which the Holy One, blessed be He! brought upon the Egyptians in Egypt was equal to four plagues? Answer, from what it is said (Ps. 78 :49) "He cast upon them the fierceness of His anger, wrath, indignation and trouble; by sending evil angels among them".' Now wrath is one, indignation is two, trouble three, and sending evil angels four; hence it is deducible that in Egypt they were afflicted with forty plagues, and at the sea they were smitten with two hundred plagues. 'Rabbi Akiba said, "From whence can it be deduced that every plague which the Holy One, blessed be He! brought upon the Egyptians in Egypt, was equivalent to five plagues? Answer, from what it is said, (Ps. 78 :49) 'He cast upon them the fierceness of his anger, wrath, indignation, trouble; by sending evil angels among them.' Now, the fierceness of his anger is one, wrath two, indignation three, trouble four, and sending evil angels five. Hence it is deduced that in Egypt they were smitten with fifty plagues, and at the sea they were smitten with two hundred and fifty plagues."' That the plagues or some of them can be explained by natural phenomena wrong-headed apologetic influenced by the rationalism of the time has endeavoured to demonstrate. The Rabbis in multiplying the number of the plagues were in the genuine tradition of earlier Passover Haggadoth such as must have been told in shrines in ancient Israel. The number ten for the plagues in the Exodus while more sedate may well have been fixed on because of the ten fingers of the hand, and themselves be a Haggadic Midrash bringing together in rapid succession all the types of plagues that afflicted the Nile valley. The reference in Ex. 12:12 about executing judgments against all the gods of Egypt may point to another reason for the individual plagues; the turning of the Nile into blood may have been a stroke against Hapi, the Nile god. The plague of frogs may have been a blow at Heka1, wife of Khnoum. The third plague of dust-sprung gnats or lice falling on the earth may have been a blow at Seb 2 , father of the gods 1 Her cult was localised south of Thebes and is played down in the post-TelAmarna Age. 2 The cosmologizing of Seb was in an earlier period than that of the Israelites in Egypt. Perhaps by that time he counted for little, though the cult was deltaic and the name was known down to Roman times. BOWMAN -

The Gospel of Mark

7

84

PROLEGOMENA

and associated with the earth. The fourth plague of flies (v.17), if one could legitimately underline that the flies' element is the air, might be a blow at Shu, son of Ra, the deified sun, or at Isis, queen of heaven. But this cannot be forced: the flies were not up in the air, but on the people, in their houses and on the ground. The significant thing about this fourth plague was that land over Goshen was to have no swarms of flies: ' "that you may know that I am the Lord in the midst of the earth."' Moses makes his request to Pharaoh as he goes in the morning to the water: '"Thus say the Lord, 'Let my people go, that they may serve me (Ex. 8 :16).' '"The plague of flies is threatened and timedforthenextday. '"'Thus I will put a division between my people and your people. By tomorrow shall this sign be."" (Ex. 8: 19). Pharaoh refuses, the plague comes, and then Pharaoh sends for Moses and suggests that the Hebrews sacrifice to God in Egypt. Moses points out that this would upset the Egyptians and states that they would go three days journey into the wilderness and there sacrifice. Pharaoh agrees, and asks for Moses to entreat God to call off the flies. Then God removed the flies, and Pharaoh hardened his heart, and did not let the people go (Ex. 8 :28), Moses is instructed to make his demand to Pharaoh again to 'let my people go, that they may serve me' (Ex. 9 :1 ), if not, 'the hand of the Lord' was on the cattle of the Egyptians to bring the fifth plague, murrain. The cattle of the children of Israel would be spared. Warning is given and a set time for its occurrence (Ex. 9:5)- 'And the Lord set a time, saying, ,,Tomorrow the Lord will do this thing in the land."' It took place, and all the cattle of the Egyptians died. But still Pharaoh would not let the Israelites go. The Lord then instructed Moses as to the sixth plague (Ex. 9 :8). "'Take handfuls of ashes from the kiln, and let Moses throw them toward heaven in the sight of Pharaoh (v.9): And it shall become fine dust over all the land of Egypt, and become boils breaking out in sores on man and beast throughout all the land of Egypt."' The sprinkling of the ashes toward heaven, and the producing of boils therefrom might be a challenge to Neit, 'the great mother queen of highest heaven.' Moses stood before Pharaoh and scattered the ashes, the sixth plague of boils came. The magicians who appear on the scene again here, were too incapacitated with boils to make any effective nuisance. The Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart as He had said He would (Ex. 4:21), when discussing the campaign with Moses. The Lord gave Moses instructions as to the seventh plague. Pharaoh

THE EXODUS AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH

85

was to be told to let the people go to serve God, or (v .14) ""'this time I will send all my plagues upon your heart, and upon your servants and your people, that you may know that there is none like me in all the earth."'" In Ex. 9 :15 Pharaoh is to be told that he and all his people could have already been smitten by pestilence, and cut off from the earth. He has been warned. God goes on to say in v.16 that Pharaoh had been raised up by God for the very purpose of God's showing His power against him. "'"and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth."'" If Pharaoh still exalted himself against God, then at the same time tomorrow God would rain hail (v.18), '""such as never has been in Egypt from the day it was founded until now."'" Warning is given in v.19 to gather in the cattle (but cf. Ex. 9:6) and everybody in the field and bring them under cover, otherwise they would die. The godfearing among the Egyptians took heed, the others did not. When at Moses' stretching out his hand to heaven, the hail came, it is not said whether any Egyptian property, beasts or crops escaped. (Ex. 9 :26) 'Only in the land of Goshen, where the people of Israel were, there was no hail.' Pharaoh (v.27) now calls for Moses and Aaron and says: '"I have sinned this time; the Lord is in the right, and I and my people are in the wrong.'" Moses agrees to his request to entreat God on his behalf, but in v.30 says: '"I know that you do not yet fear the Lord."' The hail stopped at Moses' petition and Pharaoh hardened his heart. Moses, before ushering in the eigth plague is told by God(Ex. 10: 1,2) '"I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, that I may show these signs of mine among them, and that you may tell in the hearing of your son, and of your son's son, how I have made sport of the Egyptians, and what signs I have done among them; that you may know that I am the Lord."' This was and is the reason for the telling of the Haggadah of Passover. Moses andAaron approach Pharaoh again and say(Ex.10:3) "'Thus says the Lord God of the Hebrews, 'How long will you refuse to humble yourself before me? (v.4) For if you refuse to let my people go, behold, tomorrow I will bring locusts into your country, and they shall cover the face of the land, so that no one can see the land; and they shall eat what is left to you after the hail."' Pharaoh's servants counsel him to let them go. Moses and Aaron are brought back and told that they may go and serve the Lord their God. However, an altercation develops as to who should go, and Moses and Aaron (v.6) are driven out of Pharaoh's presence. Moses (v.12) is told to stretch out his hand

86

PROLEGOMENA

over the land of Egypt, and bring up the locusts. An unparalleled plague of locusts follows, Pharaoh (v.16) hurriedly called for Moses and Aaron and said: ' "I have sinned against the Lord your God, and against you. (Ex. 10 :16) Now, therefore, forgive my sin, I pray you, only this once, and entreat the Lord your God, only to remove this death from me."' Moses entreated the Lord, who sent a mighty west wind, and cast all the locusts into the Red Sea. But (Ex. 10:20) God hardens Pharaoh's heart and he reneges once more. Moses is instructed to stretch out his hand that there may be darkness in the land of Egypt, even darkness which may be felt. It came and lasted three days. But (v.23) 'all the people of Israel had light where they dwelt.' Pharaoh now calls Moses (v.24) and agrees to let the people go, (not only the men, but their children), however their flocks and herds must stay. Moses (vv. 25, 26) says that they must have sacrifices and the cattle must go. The Lord hardens Pharaoh's heart (v. 27), and permission to go is rescinded. Pharaoh (v. 28) tells Moses to present himself no more before him. '"For in the day you see my face you shall die."' Moses said: "'As you say. I will not see your face again."' (v.29). The tenth and last plague remained which would result in Pharaoh not only permitting them to leave, but thrusting them out with all they had. First the Israelites are given the chance to increase their property by borrowing from the Egyptian neighbours (ch. 11 :2, 3). Then (v.4) Moses is informed by God that about midnight He would go through the land and the firstborn of all Egyptians, and of their beasts would die. There would be a great outcry, but not against the Israelites: (v.7) '"But against any of the people oflsrael, either man or beast, not a dog shall growl; that you may know that the Lord makes a distinction between the Egyptians and Israel."' Moses (v.8) is still speaking to Pharaoh. He tells Pharaoh that all his (Pharaoh's) servants will bow down to Moses, imploring him to get out with all his people. The Lord (v.9) again tells Moses that Pharaoh would not hearken to him,' "that my wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt."' 'And the Lord (v.10) hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he did not let the people of Israel go out of his land.' This is but the first act of the drama of Deliverance. Greater signs and wonders follow at the Passover night and the crossing of the Sea in the second act, but the greatest of all at Sinai with the giving of the Law. The climax of the drama is the covenant enacted between God

THE EXODUS AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH

87

and Israel at the hand of Moses (Ex. 24). But the heart of the matter is the Passover. The Old Testament has other Haggadoth (i.e. stories) of the plagues and departure from Egypt, besides those found in Exodus itself. This is not to be wondered at, as one would expect the Exodus theme so important in the history of Israel to be dwelt on by prophet and psalmist. One is surprised that the theme was given so little prominence in pre-exilic writings, and that one has to wait for its flowering in post-exilic times. In the examples that follow, only that in Micah and Jeremiah could possibly be pre-exilic. Neh. 9 :7-38 gives both the history of God's dealing with Israel from the Covenant with Abraham till the time of Nehemiah and is a confession of the repeated failure of the people to observe the covenant to which they - the returned exiles swear renewed allegiance confessing God's goodness throughout. There the plagues get one verse (v.9) '"And thou didst see the affliction of our fathers in Egypt and hear their cry at the Red Sea. (v.10) and didst perform signs and wonders against Pharaoh and all his servants and all the people of his land, for thou knewest that they acted insolently against our fathers; and thou didst get thee a name, as it is to this day."' It is noteworthy that Neh. 9 :7-38 only uses the term 'covenant' in relation to that with Abraham (v.8). There is no mention of the people at Sinai covenanting to keep the Law, or their becoming a covenant people there, though vv.13-15 deal with Sinai and the Law. Ps. 78 :12-53 recalls in detail the deliverance from Egypt, contrasting it with the disobedience and forgetfulness shown at a later time by the children of Ephraim. In a sense this section begins and ends with the crossing of the Sea, but within it vv. 42-51 form a subsection on the plagues ending with the slaying of the first-born. This subsection begins with vv.42,43: 'They did not keep in mind his power, or the day when he redeemed them from the foe; when he wrought his signs in Egypt, and his miracles in the fields of Zoan' (cf. vv.11 and 12, the beginning of the whole section on the deliverance from Egypt: 'In the sight of their fathers he wrought marvels in the land of Egypt: in the fields of Zoan. He divided the sea, and let them pass through it, and made the waters stand like a heap.') The downfall of the northern kingdom (cf. v.61-64) was because they did not set their hope in God, and because they did forget the works of God, and did not keep His commandments (cf. v.7).

88

PROLEGOMENA

The Exodus and all that pertained to it were events fundamental and central in the sacred history of the Acts of God to Israel, or rather to Judah which to our Psalmist is the true Israel. Ps. 105 dwells on the wonderful things that the Lord has done for Israel. Starting with the covenant with Abraham (v.9) and passing on to Israel's coming into Egypt (v.23), in rapid historical procession, it recounts the plagues (vv.27-36), (here again not ten, cf. Ps. 78:43-51, but eight), and gives special significance to the ninth plague (darkness) by mentioning it first. Whereas this Psalm tells of the departure from Egypt, there is no mention of the crossing of the sea. Egypt was glad when they departed (v.38). The quails and the manna (v.40) are mentioned and (v.41) the rock giving forth water (Num. 20:8). The plagues here are the signs and wonders in the land of Ham (v.27). The Exodus follows as a result without incident apart from 'He spread a cloud for a covering and fire to give light by night' (v.39). 'So he led forth his people with joy, his chosen ones with singing.' (v.43) This is followed immediately by: 'And he gave them the lands of the nations, and they took possession of the fruit of the peoples' toil.' Ps. 106 dwells on the revolts of Israel and the mercies of the Lord. Verse 7 is significant 'Our fathers, when they were in Egypt, did not consider thy wonderful works.' The first revolt was at the Red Sea, the second was the murmuring for flesh (Num. 11 :4f). The third revolt - Dathan and Abiram (Num. 16:1-25): the fourth revolt the making of the molten calf (Ex. 32): the fifth revolt - their refusal to enter Palestine (Num. 14:1-3): the sixth revolt - Baal Peor and idolatry (Num. 25:1-9): the seventh revolt - the waters of Meribah (Num. 20:2-13), which takes one to v.33 of the Psalm. The wilderness wanderings take up more than half the Psalm and in a sense lead on from the events of the Exodus recounted in Ps. 105; but the revolts of Ps. 106 are as it were a midrashic commentary on v.7. 'Our fathers, when they were in Egypt, did not consider thy wonderful works; they remembered not the multitude of thy mercies,' whereas in Ps. 105 :28 they (the Egyptians) rebelled against His words (deleting not as mistaken reading cf. LXX B). The plagues were the mighty acts. The eighth revolt was Israel mingling among the heathen (cf. Jud. 2:1, 2; 3:5, 6; Ps. 106: 34-46); God's wrath was kindled against His people, and He gave(v.41) them into the hand of the nations. He heard their cry and remembered His covenant. But exile and dispersion were the consequence of their neglect of God, and the Psalmist asks that

THE EXODUS AND THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH

89

they may be gathered from among the nations to give thanks to 'thy holy name, and glory in thy praise.' (v.47) Micah 6 :4 pictures God pleading with His people, '"For I brought you up from the land of Egypt, and redeemed you from the house of bondage; and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam."' Again God recalls the act of redemption, the paramount example of the loving care for Israel. Jeremiah, when Jerusalem was besieged, (Jer. 32:17ff) prayed to God, beginning by recalling God's power in creation-"'Nothing is too hard for thee,"' (v .17) and passing on to recall almost in the words of Ex. 20 :6 His loving kindness to thousands of those that love Him, and His punishing of the children for the iniquities of their fathers, giving everyone according to the fruit of his doings. In vv. 20-22 he recalls God's having shown signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, and having 'to this day,' in Israel and among other men made for Himself a name; It was "'with signs, and with wonders, with a strong hand and outstretched arm, and with great terror,'" that He brought Israel out of Egypt, and gave them the land which He had sworn to their fathers to give them. But because they did not obey God's voice, nor walk in His Law, "'therefore thou hast made all this evil come upon them.'" (v.23) Jeremiah's prayer recalls Deut. 26 :6-9 in the prayer when the priest offers the first fruits. "'And the Egyptians treated us harshly, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage. Then we cried to the Lord the God of our fathers, and the Lord heard our voice, and saw our affliction, our toil, and our oppression; and the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great terror, with signs and wonders; and he brought us into this place and gave us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey."" Here in Deut. 26 we have a memorial to the Exodus, a brief Haggadah of the Exodus, not at the Seder of Passover, but at the offering of first fruits which could either be at Hag Shabhuoth, or at Hag Sukkoth, depending on the first fruits (cereal or fruits of the tree). But the three feasts, Pesah, Shabhuoth and Sukkoth, commemorate events belonging to the same period. Pesah - the Exodus per se, Shabhuoth at Sinai in the wilderness, and Sukkoth, the dwelling in booths (tabernacles) in the wilderness.

CHAPTER EIGHT

THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK AND ITS PURPOSE We start off with Mark which earlier we saw was likely to have been the preaching of Peter interpreted by Mark. It is assuming too much to accept Mark's order of events as the actual order in which they occurred within the Ministry of Jesus. Hegesippus does not vouch for the events being given by Mark in their actual order of events. Whereas Mark's Gospel gives the appearance of giving events in chronological order, Matthew's Gospel has on the other hand (be tween his Infancy narrations and the Passion narrative) six sections: 4) Chs. 14-18. 1) Chs. 3-7. 5) Chs. 19-23. 2) Chs. 8-10. 6) Chs. 24-25. 3) Chs. 11-13. each consisting of narratives followed by teaching. The teaching need not have been given all at one time, but Matthew for the sake of catechumens sets out the New Law. Paul in I Cor. 1 :24 says that Christ is the power of God, and the Wisdom of God. Matthew in chs. 5-7 seeks to show the wisdom of God in Christ's words. Chs. 8-10 may be taken as displaying the power of God, for half of the twenty miracles that Matthew records are lumped together in these three chapters. Chs. 5-7 contain the Sermon on the Mount which in these three chapters brings together material on different subjects apparently uttered at different times, if St. Luke's Gospel is any guide to this. Below we set out the Marean Parallels of Matt. 5, 6, 7. Matthew

Ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch.

5:3-12; 5:13; 5 :15; 5:18; 5 :25, 26; 5:31, 32; 5:38-48; 6:9-15; 6:19-21; 6:22, 23;

Luke

Ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch.

6 :20-23; 14:34, 35; 11:33; 16:17; 12:57-59; 16:18; 6 :27-30; 32-36; 11 :1-4; 12:33, 34; 11 :34-36;

Matthew

Ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch. ch.

Luke

Ch. 16:13; 6:24; ch. 12:22-31; 6 :25-34; . ch. 6:37-42; 7:1-5; ch. 11:9-13; 7:7-11; ch. 6:31; 7:12; 7 :13, 14; ch. 13:23, 24; ch. 6 :43, 45; 7:15-20; ch. 13:27; 7:23; ch. 6:47-49; 7 :24-27;

THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK AND ITS PURPOSE

91

Luke's Gospel is a conscious literary production distinguished for its contrasts, the doubting Zacharias, the believing Virgin, the proud Pharisee, the humble Publican, the nine thankful lepers, the grateful one, the repentant thief, the blaspheming one, Barabbas and Jesus. The contrasts are not restricted to the personalities of the Gospel, but are seen to be in the parabolic utterances and parables, e.g. the new wine and the old wine, the faithful and the unfaithful steward, etc. The whole Gospel is a contrast from the beginning to end. The helpless babe born in a manger, the risen triumphant saviour at the end. Luke did not use Mark as a primary source as Matthew did. Luke omits 1/3 of Mark. Luke's own special material plus Q may have constituted Luke's first draft. However, where Luke does use Mark, he follows Mark's order of events much more than Matthew could be said to do, though Matthew omits only 43 verses of Mark's Gospel, sometimes however abbreviating and modifying. Matthew and Luke use Mark, but with a certain liberal attitude. Matthew as to order, Luke as to what he will use of the contents. The three synoptic Gospels have most measure of agreement in handling the events of Passion Week, the Last Supper, the Trial and Crucifixion, i.e. Matthew and Luke alike follow Mark here and behind Mark is Peter. Peter was a Jew and as such acquainted with the Jewish liturgical year. The Last Supper was a Pesah Seder. We cannot claim that the Passover Haggadah used was that of the present day in all its details. A version of the Biblical Haggadah of the Exodus may have been recounted, based on that in the Book of Exodus. The Hallel Psalms 113-118 would be sung. This would be the last meal that Peter would share with Jesus before the Crucifixion. This meal became in the early Church the memorial of Jesus, just as the Passover Seder was the memorial of the deliverance from Egypt and of the signs and wonders that God wrought up to the last and greatest of these on the Passover night itself. We know from Acts 10 that when Peter preached to Cornelius, he stressed (v.38) that Jesus went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil. Peter ends his sermon by saying. (v.43) '"To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name."' Peter stressed the signs and the wonders, not only in his preaching to Cornelius, but in the examples of his preaching which Mark set out. The Paschal meal was directly connected with the Exodus; in Israel

92

PROLEGOMENA

the Exodus was the locus classicus of Deliverance: the return from the Exile was a new Exodus. Messiah's coming was the fourth significant of Exodus, listed by the Targum J erushalmi (Ex. 12 :42). Peter in Acts 10 :40-42 stresses the Resurrection. The resurrected Christ commanded the apostles to preach to the people and to testify - and this is very significant - that it was He who was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead, which function was to be exercised by the one like the son of man in Dan. 7 :13. Peter had earlier, according to Mark's Gospel recognised Jesus as the Messiah. One wonders that it is not indeed afterwards that by dint of searching the Scriptures Peter sees in the risen Jesus the Enochidic son of man. There were several lines of expectation: the Isaianic Servant of the Lord, the Davidic Messiah and the Son of Man. God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, was how Peter explained the earthly Jesus. There was (Acts 10 :38) a transformation after His death into the Judge of the Quick and the Dead. However, even if in Acts 10 :41 the Last Supper is not mentioned, but only a Passoverseason meal after His resurrection (2nd. day of Passover), the tradition of the Last Supper and His keeping it with the disciples may go back to Peter, who stands behind Mark. It is probably very harzardous to place any reliance on the chronological scheme of events in Mark's Gospel. Whether Peter had an order of events which he used in preaching one cannot say, unless it be as in Acts 10:37-42. 1) Jesus' ministry began from Galilee after the Baptism which John preached. 2) God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with Power (when and where not stated). 3) Jesus went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed by the Devil. 4) Ministry in the country of the Jews and Jerusalem followed by Crucifixion. 5) Resurrection appearances to Peter and others who ate and drank with Him after the Resurrection. 6) Jesus commanded Peter and the apostles to preach that it is Jesus whom God had ordained to be Judge of the Quick and the Dead, presumably on the general Resurrection day. (When this will occur is not specified). In Acts 2 :22ff Peter says: (v.22) '"Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders· and signs which God did through him in your midst as

THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK AND ITS PURPOSE

93

you yourselves know-(v.23) this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. (v.24) But God raised him up, having loosed the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it."' (v.32). '"This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. (v.33) Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God .. .'" (v.36) '"Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus, whom you have crucified.'" (v.38) Peter (on being asked what they should do) said to them: "'Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jes us Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.''' V v .25-35 are interesting in showing how Peter in response to the risen Lord's command had searched the Scriptures and reached the faith set forth in v.36. Vv.25-28 cite Ps. 16(15): 8-11, as applied by David to Jesus. Peter (v.29) points out that David is both dead and buried and "'his tomb is with us to this day.'" But David was a prophet (v.30) "'knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that he would set one of his descendants upon his throne"' he foresaw not only Jesus' being raised up, i.e. coming into existence, but being resurrected, (cf. vv.31, 32. This is a reference to Ps. 132:11 'The Lord swore to David a sure oath from which he will not turn back: one of the sons of your body I will set on your throne,' cf. also II Sam. 7 :12, 13; "'When your days are fulfilled, and you lie cl.own with your fathers, I will raise up your son after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom (v.13) He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (v.14) I will be his father, and he shall be my son. When he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men.''' This passage refers to successors to David on his throne at Jerusalem. In Ps. 132: 11, 12 the promise referred to in v.11 because it followed v.10: 'For thy servant David's sake do not turn away the face of thy anointed one' (Messiah) could easily be transferred to the Messiah in the mythical theological sense which came to surround the flesh and blood heir of David's throne who on his coronation became the Lord's anointed. All the kings of Judah from Solomon to Zedekiah were Davidic Messiahs, but the Bible never called them so. It was when there was no longer a throne that the people attached their hopes to an anointed

94

PROLEGOMENA

(Messiah) descendant from David; in the Psalm the Messianic hope may be there, but even if it is not, the Psalm would be later interpreted in a Messianic sense. Peter's haggadic midrash goes on in Acts 2 :31 '"He, (David) foresaw and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption'" citing here Ps. 16 :10 'For thou dost not give me up to Sheol, or let thy godly one see the Pit. V.11 of this Psalm (16) is significant, for once, the preceding vers 10 is applied to Jesus, it (v.11) would also be applied 'Thou dost show me the path of life; in thy presence there is fullness of joy, in thy right hand are pleasures for evermore.' This at least lies partly behind 'Being exalted' at the right hand of God in Acts 2 :33, but cf. v.34. In vv.34, 35 Peter says David is not into the heavens, yet David said (Ps. 110 :1) '"'The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit at my right hand, till I make thy enemies a stool for thy feet.'"' The reasoning seems to be that if God said that to David, the latter would have gone up to heaven to sit at the right hand of God. Now, David did not do·this, so it cannot refer to David, but if 'at thy right hand' refers, or is taken to refer elsewhere to the Messiah, the descendant of David, then this refers here also to the Messiah and if it does, then he must have ascended; for what a prophet says in proclaiming the word of God must come about. There is at once a childlike quality about Rabbinic Exegesis that nothing is too wonderful, and also an adult application of the rules of the Exegesis. We must allow that because Peter, like his fellow Jews believed in the infallibility of Scripture, the end product of searching the Scriptures and applying the rules of Exegesis must be the truth. It is not doing justice to this belief in the infallibility of Scripture to think that after the event proof texts were found to support the exaltation of Jesus. We rationalise even our faith, thinking we make it more acceptable to modern man. But even so we leave enough for modern man to stumble over, though we have tampered with the faith delivered from the apostles. Paul was no further removed from the human Jesus than the apostles who had been with Him. Having identified Jesus with the Messiah, Peter found Him in his reading of the Scriptures and so did Paul, but his reading and his exegesis were different sometimes, but cf. Acts. 13 :35 where Paul preaching at Antioch quotes Ps. 16 :10: ""Thou wilt not let thy Holy One see corruption.'"' Bishop Blunt in his introduction to his commentary on Mark in the Clarendon Bible, after summarising the picture of Jesus in Mark's

THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK AND ITS PURPOSE

95

Gospel in almost three pages, writes in p. 52: 'This then is the Marean picture of Jes us. When we view it thus in isolation, it strikes us at once as being a very meagre story. The chronological notices are so sparse and vague that one year might be taken as the duration of our Lord's public ministry; and even of that year large parts are unaccounted for. The arrangement of the anecdotes in the Galilean section seems confused. The story gives no explanation of the way in which Jesus' name became known in Jerusalem; (there is no trace of an early ministry in Jerusalem such as the fourth Gospel records). Jesus is presented as beginning as a teacher, but of his teaching in Galilee (and even later too) very little is recorded, and that little is mostly incidental. It is a story about Jesus, but it does not give us much idea of what Jesus actually preached. If this were a biography, it would be a very defective one.' And then, further on (pp. 52-53) 'Thus the Marean Jesus, is neither, as in Matthew, the giver of the new Law, nor as in Luke, the preacher of a Catholic fraternity. The Marean Jesus is an austere figure, mysterious, stormy, and impervious. This portrait is drawn with the utmost economy of line and colour. Practically all is subordinated to the emphasising of the Messianic intention. First He announces the Messianic Kingdom, then He admits the Messianic position, then He publicly assumes the Messianic role, goes up to Jerusalem to die, and dies for His Messianic claim.' Whereas the present writer cannot agree with all the points in the above quotations as will appear later in our discussion of Mark's Gospel, yet one would endorse the statement, a) that it does not give us much idea of what Jesus actually preached; (with this reservation, however, that the miracles as told in Mark, were part of His preaching). b) that if this were a biography, it would be a very defective one, (but is it meant to be a biography?) c) that practically all is subordinated to the emphasizing of his Messianic intention. The present writer is of the opinion that with the Matthean and Lucan Gospels in front of us supplementing the Marean picture it is too easy to regard Mark's Gospel as defective. But what do we mean by defective? In the first place it is we who are passing the judgment of its being defective, and like most human judgments it has a strong subjective element in it. It appears to us defective? But did it appear to Mark as defective? We are apt to regard Mark's Gospel as a first attempt at writing a connected story of the Lord's life, improved on later by the writers of the First and Third Gospels.

96

THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK AND ITS PURPOSE

Bishop Blunt (Ibid., p. 28) cogently points out that the Papias Fragment on Mark's Gospel 'makes it clear that in Papias' time the "order" of Mark's Gospel was criticized.' He notes that by Papias' time the standard Gospel was now Matthew. Important too is the fact that ("°'~~io here seems to be a pun on their counting of the letters of the Law.! This is hardly evidence as against the frequent mention of ypcx.µµcx.-re:Lc; in the New Testament of the first century A.D. It is true that the term c•iE:>io is rarely used in the Mishnah whereas c·~:in is on practically every page. It could be that c•~:in came into use only after 70 A.D. (cf. Moore, Judaism, vol. I, pp. 43-44). However, the term Sopherim could still be used in the second century as an honorific title of learned men (T.B. Sotah 15a). Occasionally too we come across the term in Tannaitic literature, e.g. Rabbi Joshua hen Hananiah, end of first century, beginning of second, is reported several times to have said: 'The Scribes have invented a new thing and I have nothing to reply.' (cf. M. Kelim 13:7 - Tebul Yorn 4:6; cf. also Tos. Tebul Yorn 2:14 and Tos. Kelim Baba Metzia 3 :15). (Presumably he had no tradition on the subject and he is speaking of the new hermeneutic methods, which were so fruitful in developing the Halakhah further in the second century). The Pharisees also do not appear often in Rabbinical literature. In the Mishnah c•tviiE> are only mentioned in M. Hag. 2:7; M. Sotah 3:4; M. Yadaim 4:6,7,8; 5:9. In the Tosefta, (Tos. Ber. 3:25) (where Perushim are mentioned along with Heretics!) Tos. Shah. 1 :14; Tos. Hag. 3:35; Tos. Sotah 15:11; Tos. Yad. 2:20. In the Babylonian Talmud: T.B. Shah. 13a; T.B. Pes. 70b; T.B. Yoma 19b; T.B. Baba

338

DETACHED NOTES

Bathra 50b; T.B. Sotah 22b (the famous picture of the seven types of the Pharisees); T.B. Kidd. 66a (the well known story of the origin of the Pharisees in a secession of the learned in the time of King J annai): T.B. Baba Bathra 60b is an example of the difficulty of saying that any reference to c•wii!:l refers to Pharisees; this haggadah tells of some Perushim who after the destruction of the Temple did not wish to eat meat or drink wine, because the sacrifices of the altar were no more; T.B. Niddah 33b might equate clearly the Perushim with the Rabbinic Sages, e.g. there it is said: 'Even though they are Sadducean women they are afraid of the Perushim and show their blood to the Sages.' References to the Perushim in the Palestinian Talmud are: P.T. Ber. IX, 14b and P.T. Sotah V, 20c, (the Palestinian Talmud's version of the seven types of the Parush); P.T. Hag. 79d; P.T. Sotah III, 19a; P. T. Peah XIII, 21a. In the Tannaitic Halakhic Midrash Sifra 57b, 99d, on Lev. 11 :45, there is the injunction: ('You shall be holy') even as I am holy, so be you holy: as I am Parush, separate - so be you separate (perushim).' This may or may not refer to the Pharisees. Where Pharisee is in opposition to Sadducee, (cf. e.g. M. Yadaim 4:6,7.) the sect of the Pharisees mentioned in New Testament and Josephus as opposed to the Sadducees is clearly referred to. But with other occurrences of the word Parush this is not clear. Parush in Rabbinic sources does not always mean Pharisee. In fact Parush was a word of many uses. Were it not for Josephus (Ant. XIII. x. 5; and XVIII .i.2) and the New Testament one would have questioned whether the Pharisees ever called themselves Perushim. Not all Pharisees would be Scribes, though all non-Sadducean Scribes (and presumably there were Sadducean too) would be Pharisaic. In my text I have suggested that the Scribes were the Haberim of the Pharisees, i.e. the conclave of the Order. There has been a tendency since the end of last century to regard Pharisee and Haber as quite interchangeable terms. The argument is that Haber is the title taken by or bestowed on the individual in relation to the other Haberim of the Haburah, while Pharisee is a nickname given by outsiders denoting the separation which members of the Haber community made between themselves and the Am ha-Aretz. If we accept this we have an explanation why the term Pharisee is not used much in the literature of the Tannaim and Amoraim. Moore, Judaism, vol. III, p. 26, warned that 'the common outright identification of the Pharisee with the 'associates' is without warrant in our sources.' Burkitt, J.T.S. XXVIII, 1927, in an article 'Jesus and the Pharisees,'

DETACHED NOTES

339

protested against the facile acceptance of the equation Pharisee = Haber= good Jew. The term Haber like the term Parush had several meanings; cf. e.g. T.B. Niddah 33b, where R. Papa speaks of a Samaritan Haber, and Abaye, ibid. of a Sadducee Haber! Granted this is fourth century evidence, but these Amoraim did not make the equation Haber = Pharisee = Rabbi. The earliest explicit statement that Pharisee = Haber is much later and is found in Arukh of Nathan ben Jechiel, (b. 1035, d. 1106). He defines Pharisees thus: 'they are the Haberim who eat their ordinary food in ritual purity.' Travers Herford, The Pharisees, p. 34 practically makes the giving of tithes the distinguishing feature of the Haberim and postulates the origin of the Haberim in the reign of John H yrcanus as a direct result of his tithe reforms. (T.B. Sotah 48a; Tos. Sotah 13:10; M. Sotah 9:10; M. Ma'aser Shemi 5:15 for Johanan the High Priest's Tithe Reform, a good example of how the Law could be modified by regularising the status quo.) Having decided that the Pharisees started in the reign of John Hyrcanus, the Haberim, keen on tithing must start then too and in fact be identical with the Perushim. Actually the earlier Rabbinic sources do not stress the giving of tithes as the distinguishing feature of the Haberim; (cf. M. Demai 6 :6): the school of Shammai says: A man may sell his olives only to an Associate (Haber). The school of Hillel says: Even to one that (only) pays tithes (Ma'aser). Another term similar to Ma'aser is trusty one (ne'eman) - about tithing (cf. M. Demai 2 :2). Tos. Demai 2:11( cf. T.B. Bekhor. 30a Baraitha) shows that there was a minimum requirement for becoming a Haber: 'They go and accept him on the washing of hands and afterwards they accept him on the cleanness laws, but if he takes upon himself the cleanness laws they accept him. With the Haber there is no explicit mention of tithing, (cf. M. Demai 2 :3). The sine qua non was cleanness of hands. Tos. Demai 2:12 gives information regarding the time of probation necessary before acceptance into the Haber community. Beth Hillel and Beth Shammai both first century A.D. legislated for this but had different views. Tos. Dem. 2:12: 'After how long do they accept a man as a Haber?' Beth Shammai says: 'For liquids 30 days and for clothes 12 months.' But Beth Hillel says: 'In both cases 30 days'. He who comes to take these obligations upon himself, even ifhe is Talmid Hakham it is necessary for him to take them upon himself: but a Hakham who has a seat in the Y eshibah need not take them on himself, and not only so, but others may do so before him. If a man has Studia Post-Biblica

VIII

23

340

DETACHED NOTES

taken these obligations on himself before a Haburah, his sons and his servants need not take them before a Haburah but may do so before him. T.B. Bekhor. 30a covers the same ground. Further in the account of T.B. Bekhor. 30 Abba Shaul says that a Talmid Hakham need not accept in front of three Haberim, and furthermore others may accept in· front of him. Then follows the interesting story of R. Judah and R. Jose and how they were in doubt about a point in the laws of ritual and cleanness. They referred to the son of R. Hanina b. Antigonus who had been a priest; treated in a rather offhand fashion, R. Judah said to R. Jose, 'His father (i.e. of Rabbi Hanina b. Antigonus) despised the Talmide Hakhamim and he also despises the Talmide Hahamim.' R. Jose said to him: 'The honour of the elder is left in touched, but since the day on which the Temple was destroyed, the Priests guarded their dignity, decided not to entrust matters of levitical cleanness to everybody.' In this two things are significant: a) the admission of R. Judah and R. Jose that the son of R. Hanina b. Antigonus who had been a priest should know the purity laws better than they because of his priestly descent, and b) that the priests after the destruction of the Temple did not entrust matters of levitical purity to everybody. This last seems to point to the laws of purity after 70 A.D. having been deliberately kept up by the priests and perhaps fostered by them. One can see that it would be to their advantage and prestige to encourage interest in them. On the other hand there is evidence, (cf. T.B. Yeb. 86b) that people like Akiba demanded that the now otiose hereditary priesthood fulfil to the letter the purity laws, if they were still to benefit by being of priestly stock. Although in the mid-second century the duties of the Haber were extended, (cf. R. Meir's rulings in Tos. Dem. 2 :2) yet the duties of the Haber as such were clearly marked. This does not mean that the Haber was of a lower status than a Talmid or a Hakham. Obviously not necessarily so. The difference seems to have been functional. The Talmid Hakham studied and developed the Law, the Haber bound himself to practice certain aspects of it. However it does not seem that a man could be a Talmid Hakham and not be a Haber (cf. Tos. Demai 2:13). This is a very important point. If we could say that this represented first century practice it might explain a lot indeed, e.g. the difference between Scribes and Pharisees; but it may well be that this distinction between Haber and Talmid Hakham was a later development. But despite the difference between the Talmid Hakham and the Haber, (Tos. Dem.

DETACHED NOTES

341

2:13), the Hakham seems to be a sort of ex officio member of the Haburah. Abba Shaul is recognised as a reliable source for traditions about conditions in pre-destruction times. If Abba Shaul is expressing an old Tradition when he says that a Talmid Hakham need not accept in front of three Haberim, then possibly the Talmid Hakham was ex officio a Haber in early times, i.e. he could assume membership if he wished. It is quite possible that where there was a Shammaite Haburah and a Hillelite one; a man who followed the Hillelite regulations might have been in danger of being considered little better than an Am haAretz by the Shammaites. One is struck by the fact that the name Pharisee is mentioned so seldom in Mishnah or Talmud. One wonders if this like the New Testament term 'Scribes' was an expression common in the first century only. If Pharisee and Haber were synonymous in the first century it is strange that our Greek sources do not refer to it. Wellhausen suggested in Pharisaer und Sadducaer, Greifswald, 1874, pp. 4041, that the term Haber applied originally to the member of the Sanhedrin and that after 70 A.D. the term was adopted by the Rabbis for members of their Y abneh Sanhedrin. He thought that not only did the later Tannaim take over the name Sanhedrin and apply it to their Rabbinic College, but that they also took over the title of the officials who sat on it. 'Wahrscheinlich verhalt es sich ebenso mit dem Namen Chaberim. Chaber eines Andres kann jeder sein, aber Chaber schlechthin kann nicht jeder sein. Nun ist Cheber = cruveapwv und Chaber = cruveapoc;.' This is how we would understand the Scribes of the Pharisees of the first century, Haberim in the sense of the members of the Sanhedrin. There were of course many sorts of Haburah, e.g. one could call the group that sat down to a Passover meal a Haburah, but it is not in that less technical sense we speak here. DETACHED NOTE

G

Elijah Apart from Luke 4:25; 9:54, Rom. 11:2 and James 5:17, the references to Elijah in the New Testament do not depict him as at all like the prophet mentioned in I Kings 17, 18, 19, 21 and II Kings 1, 2. The picture of Elijah hinted at in the Gospels owes more to Mal. 3 :23 but important as this is in Matt. 11 :14; 17 :13 in which the forerunner

342

DETACHED NOTES

John is identified with Elijah to Jesus' Messiah, yet extra-Biblical sources must be consulted to help understand what association the name Elijah conjured up in peoples' minds in the first century A.D. In any investigation like this we are hampered by having little or any evidence apart from the New Testament belonging to the first century. We have earlier evidence and we have later. One must try to deduce as nearly as possible in the light of earlier trends and later developments what were the main views about Elijah in the first century outside the New Testament. While we must not expect the New Testament writers to agree with what we may feel were the current Jewish views, for that would be to deny them any originality, we cannot on the other hand expect them not to reflect such views even if but to oppose them. It should be pointed out that Mal. 3 :22 '"Remember the law of my servant Moses, the statutes and ordinances that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel"' is necessary for understanding Mal. 3 :23 '"Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes."' v. 24- '"And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the land with a curse."' Elijah here is bringing back the people to the Law. Prophecy is for Malachi the servant of the Law. The Law is the good way which if one follows there is blessing (cf. Deut. 27), if one rejects one receives the curses of Deut. 28. Ben Sira, c. 200 B.C. (ch. 48 :1-12) gives a very brief resumee of the highlights of Elijah's work as given in the books of Kings and devotes two verses (10-12a) to Mal. 3:23. 'To still wrath before the fierce anger of God; to turn the heart of the fathers to the children and to restore the tribes oflsrael' (Ben Sira 48:10,11 ). Two things are significant here, a) Ben Sira does not clearly link up as does Mal. 3 :23 Elijah with the great and dreadful day of the Lord, and b) Ben Sira with the phrase 'the restoration of the tribes of Israel' does bring in the idea of restoration as a feature of Elijah's work in the future, which is at least commented on in Rabbinic sources and in the New Testament. (Matt. 17 :11, Mark 9 :12 - 'to restore all things.'). Whereas Ben Sira does not specifically mention Elijah's zeal for the Law the writer of 1 Maccabees does: (cf. 1 Mace. 2:58, where Mattathias in his speech before his death says 'Elijah for that he was exceeding zealous for the Law, was taken up into heaven'). Zeal for the Law is the epitome of Elijah's work. In Targum, Midrash and Talmud one finds the view

DETACHED NOTES

343

expressed that Elijah was of priestly stock. (Targ. Ps. Jon. Ex. 6:18, Num. 25 :12 and Pirke de R. Eliezer - (p. 263, Friedlander's edition) even suggest Elijah is the same as Phinehas the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the Priest. One is reminded of John the Baptist himself of priestly stock being held to be Elijah in Matt. 11 :14 as a result of this identification of Elijah with Phinehas who turned God's wrath away from the children of Israel because of his zeal (cf. Num. 25 :11 ). Pirke de R. Eliezer makes God say to Elijah at Horeb (1 Kings 19:8) 'By thy life! they shall not observe the covenant of circumcision until you see it (done) with your eyes.' Hence adds the Midrash the sages instituted the custom that people should set a seat of honour for the Messenger of the Covenant, for Elijah may he be remembered for good, called the Messenger of the Covenant, and it is said: '"And the messenger of the covenant, in whom ye delight, behold he is coming.' (Mal. 3:1). (cf. also Pirke de R. Eliezer p. 371, identifying Phinehas and Elijah) - Elijah being another name for Phinehas ! sic - and stressing the covenant of everlasting priesthood - (cf. Num. 25:13) to Phinehas/Elijah. In the Mishnah apart from one case M. Sotah 9:15 which associates Elijah with the Resurrection of the Dead, Elijah is expected to give halakhic rulings on difficult points of law. - when he comes. (M. Eduy. 8 :7 contains an important disclaimer which at least stems from pre-Christian times that 'Elijah will not come to declare unclean or clean, remove afar or bring nigh' (i.e. alter the Law) but to remove afar those that were brought nigh by violence.' Elijah's function of restorer is rather like Ezra's in restoring the community by removing aliens. The other five cases M. Shek. 2 :5; M. Baba Metzia 1 :8; 2 :8; 3:4,5; refer to objects or money to be set aside until Elijah comes and says to whom it belongs and what is to be done with it. While he will not alter the Law, he will restore the property to its rightful owner. One wonders however if in these cases it really means that the coming of Elijah before the Day of Judgment was thought to be near (cf. Mal. 3 :24) or that here we are dealing with another view attested in Haggadic stories in Talmud, that Elijah visited certain early Rabbis. This latter seems to be the more likely in that in M. Baba Metzia 3 :4,5, it is R. Jose who is associated with the rule that sums of money whose ownership is in question should remain unallotted until Elijah comes, and in T.B. Ber. 3a this same R. Jose tells how Elijah appeared to him in the ruins of Jerusalem and gave him information on certain halakhic points. On the occasion of the excommunication of R. Eliezer

344

DETACHED NOTES

ben Hyrcanus at the end of the 1st. century, when Rabbi Joshua and R. Akiba refused to listen to the Bath Qol or heavenly voice supporting Eliezer's halakhic ruling - because as they maintained the law was no more in heaven but had been once and for all revealed at Sinai and it was for men by their reason to apply it, - it was Elijah who met one of the Rabbis that day and told them that the Almighty who studies the Law daily in the Heavenly Sanhedrin had said 'My sons have beaten me.' Elijah was said to visit frequently the school of R. Judah ha-Nasi (the editor of the Mishnah). While there are traditions that Elijah did visit some of the Tannaim, they are more plentiful in relation to the Amoraim: (cf. e.g. Raba bar Abuha T.B. Baba Metzia 114b, where despite M. Eduy. 8:7 questions relating to purification are discussed by Raba bar Abuha and Elijah). It seems likely that Elijah even before the first century was associated not only with prophecy but with the Law (cf. 1 Mace. 2:58): but whereas before it was primarily the Written Law, later the Rabbis with their growing emphasis on the Oral Law brought Elijah into connection with this too. We have seen Elijah identified with Phinehas and the Covenant of Priesthood, and also with the Covenant of Circumcision. With this latter we may see an attempt on the part of the Rabbis either before or after the fall of the Temple to heighten the importance of the laity by making Elijah patron of the Covenant open to all males, priestly as well as lay. Further the Pharisaic Rabbis sought to ascribe as great sanctity to the canon of the Prophets as to the Law; but to do this they had to bring the prophets within the aegis of the Law. In this connection Elijah a prophet with no oracles committed to writing, but with the tradition of having had spiritual experience at Sinai was of fundamental importance to unite prophecy and Law. Elijah and the Messiah. In Jewish sources while Elijah is associated with the Messiah the picture is not always clear as to what his function in this respect is. In Targ. Ps. Jon. Ex. 40:10 Elijah seems to be not only the one who restores the things missing in the second Temple (among which was the anointing oil), but the High Priest who will anoint the Messiah. According to Seder Olam Raba ch. 37 Elijah in the war against Gog and Magog is the deliverer in the future, as Moses in the past. According to T.B. Baba Metzia 85b Elijah at Rabbi (Judah ha-Nasi's) beth Din told the secret of how Messiah's advent and the Resurrection could be expedited; for this indiscretion Elijah was lashed with 60 lashes of fire. T.B. Y oma 20 a finds Elijah answering the question why the Messiah's coming is delayed. In fact we find in

DETACHED NOTES

345

Rabbinic literature more information conveyed by Elijah to Rabbis about the Messiah, than statements about Elijah and his relationship to the Messiah. However, we must remember that for the Rabbis the coming of the Messiah and the rule of the Law were closely related. The Targum to Isa. 53 shows that the Messianic Age is the rule of Law. Elijah, prophet that he was, would not be felt by a first century Rabbi as opposed to the Law. Mattathias the Maccabee had mentioned Elijah's zeal for the Law. This aspect of Elijah's ministry would be heightened by the Rabbis of the succeeding centuries, but was there probably from the time of Malachi and was not felt to be contrary to his connection with the coming of the Messiah. It could be argued that with the delay in the coming of the Messiah, and the Day of the Lord, Elijah's coming which was to prepare Israel was not delayed, but repeated, as part of the work of preparation. The longer the delay, the greater the need, and for the Rabbis it meant more Law: even God had to keep up this study of the Law. The key word is in Mal. 3 :24 is V :rnz; in the phrase 'And he will turn the hearts of fathers their children etc.' The hiphil of V~V) means to restore. In Mark 9:11 Jesus in answering the disciples' question '"Why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come"'? says (v.12) "'Elijah does come first to restore all things. (as it is written of him)"' (13b ). This work of restoration was more than settling halakhic problems on money questions or possessions (cf. M. Shek. 2 :5, Baba Metzia 1 :8; 2 :8; 3 :4,5; but out of the V ::iiiz; comes too the idea of Elijah returning; when and for what depends on one's emphasis. Teshubah, repentance also comes from the V ::iiiz;. In Matt. 3 :2, John appears in the wilderness of Judea calling for repentance "'Repent ye.'" Matt. 11 :14 identifies Jesus' remarks on Elijah as referring to John the Baptist. Does Mark 9:13 point in that direction? While Luke 1 :17 does not strictly identify John and Elijah, John 1 :21 makes him deny he is Elijah. Mark 2: 18 seems to link the disciples of John with the Pharisees over against the disciples of Jesus. Matt. 11 :13 clearly identifies John with the prophets and the Law. Repentance, even 'baptism of repentance unto remission of sins,' Mark 1 :4 (R.V.) could be within the context of the Law. In Mark 3 :22 (R.V.) and the Scribes from Jerusalem said of Jesus 'He hath Beelzebub' and 'By the prince of the devils casteth he out devils' not recognizing the spirit that was in him since the Baptism. The con-

346

DETACHED NOTES

trast between John and Jes us is all the greater if John be identified with Elijah redivivus, for Elijah had asked (II Kings 1 :2) if there was no God in Israel that they went to Baalzebub, the god of Ekron?' Elijah now was seen within the context of the Law as was John the Baptist; Jes us was not recognized by the protagonists of the Law as working under its authority and they were the prisoners of their preconceptions, and rejected Hirn. The Transfiguration with the recognition of Hirn by Moses and Elijah seeks to redress the picture and show that they were more perspicacious than their latter day advocates. I have sometimes wondered whether without Matt. 11 :14 one could have dared to see the mention in Mark 9:13 as referring to John the Baptist, and whether we should not take Jesus' cornrnent: Elijah indeed comes first, and restores all things (Syr. Kul rnedern) as a caustic cornrnent on the scribal teaching cited by the disciples that Elijah must come first. How could He, the Son of Man expect to be understood, when Elijah the prophet, with his blazing zeal for God is reduced to a lackey of the Oral Law to suit the Rabbinic whims. DETACHED NOTE

H

Scriptural allusions in Sepher Eliyahu used as asrnaktoth: 2 Sarn. 2, 26 : Mic. 4, 10 : Isa. 29, 4: Deut. 28, 1: Isa. 49, 23 : Isa. 11,5: Zech. 14,12: Ezek. 36,8: Zech. 14,3: Isa. 18, 6: Ezek. 39, 9: Zech. 2, 5: Isa. 26, 21 : Deut. 32, 39 : Ezek. 37,8: Isa. 66, 24 : Ps. 11, 6: Ezek. 47,12: Ezek.47, 10 : Ps. 122, 3: Isa. 54,13: Ps. 31,19. Dan. 12,1: Isa, 61, 10 : Ps. 104,1: Deut. 32,13: Isa. 58, 14 : Jer. 3, 17 : Isa. 51,11: Jud. 5, 31 : Isa. 49, 23 : Dan. 2,46: Isa. 54,12: I Chr. 29, 23 : II Chr. 1,15: I Kings 18,31 : Jer. 17, 12 : Isa. 44, 23 : Dan. 7, 13 : Hab. 3, 4: S of S 8, 6: Isa. 19,2: Jer. 25, 30 : Ezek. 25, 14 : Isa. 19,1: Isa. 63, 1: Isa. 43, 14 : Jer. 49, 38 : Deut. 32, 35 : S of S 5, 1: S of S 4, 10 : S of S 4,11: S of S 4, 9: Isa. 62, 5 Isa. 61, 10 : Isa. 49, 18 : Isa. 59,17: Isa. 63, 1: Isa. 63, 3: Ps. 104,1: Isa. 63, 2: Deut. 32, 42 : Ez. 25, 14 : Ps. 60, 9: Isa. 60,7: Isa. 16,4: Ps. 71, 20 : Isa. 42, 15 : Gen. 9, 12 ·17 : Isa. 11,4: IIKings 19, 35 : Mal. 3, 23 : Zech. 14,1·2: Isa. 41, 6 : Zech. 14, 2: Zech. 14, 3: Ezek. 39,17: Isa. 59, 19 : Jer. 31, 9.20 : Isa. 52,7: Jer. 9, 10 : Isa. 55,12: Joel. 3,18 : Ezek.47, 2: Isa. 33, 21 : Ezek. 47,12: J er. 30, 18 : Isa. 60, 8: Zech. 9,1: Prov. 9, 3: Ezek. 28,13: Ps. 49, 14 .15 : I Kings 8,13: Hos. 14,2: Ps. 84,7: Ps. 3,8: x Ps. 89, 36: Isa. 26,2: S of S 8, 2: S of S 5,1: Ps. 16,5: Ps. 23, 0 : Ps. 116, 13 : Ps. 7,18: Isa. 30,15: Isa. 26,11: Job. 40, 31 ( :41,7): Ps. 144, 12 : Gen.49,11: Gen. 49, 12 : Deut. 32,14 : Prov. 4, 18 : Ps. 11,6:

347

DETACHED NOTES

Hab. 3, 4 : Ps. 29, 7 : Ps. 139,12: Jer. 7, 34 : 16,9 ; 25, 10 ; 33,U: Hos. i.10: Joel. 4,21: Amos. 1,11: Obad. 1,21 : Jon. 2, 2 ; Zech. 1,16 : Ps. 31,19. DETACHED NOTE

I

'After Three Days' We should not be concerned with trying to square the Synoptic dating of the Last Supper, Passion, Trial and Crucifixion, with that of John. Nor should we feel bound to try to show the difficulty of explaining how the Synoptic Trial and Crucifixion could have happened on Passover. Theology, not history were the concerns of both Mark and the Synoptists on the one hand, and John on the other. Even the Passion Story like the Crucifixion is haggadic midrash told not to satisfy the curious about times and seasons and the contemporary fulfilling of such, but to show the inner and real significance of the events which happened then to Jesus and what was wrought by Him. It is seen as fulfilment of earlier promises: but how they are shown to be fulfilled depends on the individual Gospel writer's attitude to the various elements in the Old Testament, and how he reconciles them with one another. The Temple and its Feasts are integral to John's Gospel. Jesus does not curse the Temple in John's Gospel, nor abandon it as in Mark. The Temple veil is not rent in John's Crucifixion as in Mark denoting the end of the Atonement ritual there. It has been pointed out (cf. Burkill 'Mysterious Revelation, p. 261) that John's dating of the Crucifixion on the day before Passover, Passover itself being a Sabbath with the Resurrection on the morrow of the Sabbath, fits in with the time when the Omer and Sheaf of the first-fruits of the harvest would be offered in the Temple. But this last is the very reason surely for such dating. John could be bodying out the words of Paul in a haggadic midrash. We must allow that Peter/Mark too is more concerned with Theology than history. If so he would not produce a theological treatise, but a haggadic midrash, so constructed as to body forth in story form the propositions he believed to be true about Jesus' life and death and their relation to God's earlier promises to Israel as understood by him. If we are right in suggesting that Mark is a Jewish Christian Passover Haggadah, Jesus must celebrate the Passover. Difficulties about His arrest, Trial and Crucifixion on Passover are no concern for Peter/Mark's Midrash; in fact they would, if the early Christian thought about them at all, only show that God's will must be done, and the

348

DETACHED NOTES

plans of the High Priests be frustrated (Mark 14:1,2). For the author of the Gospel, the will and word of God, (i.e. His expressed Will) was to be found in the Scriptures of the Old Testament or rather in those part that he understood as pointing to Jesus, his Messiah. In them he saw Jesus as He for him most truly was. In them he had not only confirmation of his faith but a forecast - or now he saw it so (cf. Luke 24 :25-27) of His life and death. That the Haggadic midrash came to be regarded as sacred history is a testimony to the faith it evoked; that it came to be regarded as historical like any professedly historical writing of Greece or Roman, while a testimony to its verisimilitude, probably points to lack of spiritual understanding among those who thought it a historical record. If we do so, have we failed to discern the parable? Would its author regard us spiritually blind and spiritually deaf? The Gospel of Mark begins with the Baptism of Jes us and ends with His Baptism as He predicted. Both Baptisms were events of Power. In the first He received the Spirit; in and through the second all can receive the Spirit in and through Him. In the three predictions of His death (Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:34) it is stated that fLETIJ(. -rpi::Lc; ~fLEplJ(.c; 'after three days' He will rise again. Matt. 16:21 and Luke 9:22, Matt. 20:19 and Luke 18:33, and Matt. 17:23 for their parallels to these predictions have T'(l -rpLT'(l ~fLEP'f· F. W. Beare (ibid., p. 139) dismisses too lightly this difference in the Synoptic Gospels when he says 'the variation after three days' (Mark) 'on the third day', Matthew, Luke, is not significant.' META, with the accusative (Mark 1 :14; 8:31; 9:2; 9:31; 10:34; 13:24; 14:1; 14:28; 14:70; clearly means 'after.' It is perhaps significant that the Peshitta while translating fLETIJ(. as 'after' by i~ in Mark 9:2, after six days and Mark 14:1 after two days, carefully omits it in Mark 8 :31; 9 :31; 10 :34, probably for the same reason as the Matthean and Lucan parallels. In Matt. 27:64 where the Pharisees quote Jesus as saying He would arise fLETIJ(. -rpi::Lc; ~µi:;plJ(.c; and as a result Pilate posts a guard on the tomb ewe; TYJc; -rpLT'Y)c; ~fLEplJ(.c; the Peshitta translates fLETIJ(. by i~. The guards according to Matt. 28:2 were there when the earthquake and the rolling back of the stone by the angel took place as the Maries went to the sepulchre on the morning of the Sunday. The point seems to be that it happened even before the three days had elapsed. It is customary to talk of the Resurrection as on the third day - after what? The Marean Last Supper was on the evening of the 15th. Nisan, and would be over before midnight; the Passion in

DETACHED NOTES

349

Gethsemane, the Betrayal, the examination at the High Priest's residence, the 'trial', the appearance before Pilate, the Crucifixion were during the night, and morning and afternoon of the 15th. Nisan as also was the burial. Looked at from Jewish reckoning it was one day, but from Roman reckoning the events covered the evening and night of one day, and the daytime of another. The Sabbath is from Friday evening to Saturday evening. The first day of the Jewish week started from Saturday evening and would go on to Sunday evening. At the most he would be 36 hours in the tomb as He is said (Mark 16:6), not to be there early on the morning of the first day of the week, Sunday. One might attempt to argue that He had even by Jewish reckoning of days been in it on the 15th. at least before the 16th. began, on the 16th the Sabbath and part of the 17th. the first day of the week. Actually none of the Gospels, not even John point out that He rose on the third day. We find it however in Peter's preaching in Acts 10:40, and in the Pauline affirmation in 1 Cor. 15 :4. that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. This latter probably refers to Hos. 6 :2. 'After two days he will revive us; and on the third day he will raise us up.' This too may be the source of Peter's affirmation; 'him God raised the third day' Acts 10:40 R.V.). But why in the three predictions in Mark does Peter/Mark make Jesus repeat specifically 'after three days'? Can it be that 'after three days' points to something significant for the development of the Midrash? Other elements in the three predictions vary; this is constant. Exact time indications in Mark are extremely rare; this indication 'after three days' is as it were underlined. Even if it were equivalent to 'on the third day' still we might well ask why this form of expression 'after three days' is used. If we are right in thinking Mark is a Christian Passover Haggadah of the New Exodus we should find some indication in the Exodus story which has influenced this logion. And we find it in Ex. 3:18,19. God tells Moses to go, he and the elders oflsrael to the King of Egypt, and say to him,'" 'The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, has met with us; and now, weprayyou, let us goa three days' journey into the wilderness that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God.'"' In Ex. 5 :3,4 Moses and Aaron confront Pharaoh with this request, only to be refused and blamed for making 'the people of the land' rest from their burdens. In Ex. 8 :23 Moses reiterated the demand. Van Goudoever (ibid. p. 129) points out that there is evidence of an early tradition testified to by Josephus (Ant. II. xv. 1) that it was on the third day they came

350

DETACHED NOTES

to the Red Sea. He notes that Artapan (1st. century B.C.) cited by Eusebius in Evang. Prep.: IX 27, has a similar view. Marqa in his Memar (cf. Goudoever, op. cit. p. 129) states that the Israelites' journey to the Red Sea took three days; Marqa however, makes them cross only on the seventh day of Unleavened bread. But the Samaritan Asatir as Goudoever (ibid) points out 'concludes that the people departed from Egypt on Thursday and that they crossed the Sea after three days on the going out of the Sabbath. The fact that in the Samaritan Liturgy, the first Sabbath after Passover is called the Sabbath of the Sea is significant. There seems then to have been an early Jewish and Samaritan tradition that placed the Crossing of the Sea three days after the Passover. That later Jewish tradition dated the crossing differently is not to the point, unless it could be argued that they were reacting against exploitation by others of the Crossing being after three days. We must remember that the Passover was not the Exodus, but the event which set the final phases of the Exodus in motion. The movement towards the Exodus started at the Burning Bush when God commissioned Moses and told him what to demand from Pharaoh. Eventually Pharaoh and the Egyptians were driven to accede to the demand following the slaying of the Firstborn concomitant with the Passover. But the Israelites were not free until they had crossed through the Sea. This is the real Exodus. In Isa. 43:16,17 in thinking of that new Exodus from Babylonia it is the crossing of the Sea celebrated in Ex. 15 that is the feature of the Exodus that is dwelt on. (Isa. 51 :9-11), might be even more significant combining as it does elements of the myth of the cosmic struggle at Creation and reminiscences of the Exodus crossing. It would be strange if Mark is a haggadic midrash of the New Exodus, should this the climax of the Exodus not find a place. Luke 9 :31 at the Transfiguration states that Moses and Elijah spoke of His departure (Exodus) which he was to accomplish at Jerusalem. Was His dying on the cross His Exodus? One doubts if it was even for Matthew or even for Luke, though they have in their different ways altered the Marean midrash, without being able to substitute a radically new basic pattern or approach as has John. But for Mark there is really no doubt that the Exodus only begins at Jerusalem with the Paschal Last Supper. The rejection of Him by the elders and priests to the Romans who put Him to death, is as it were the counterpart to the hounding of Moses and the Israelites out of Egypt and pursuit

DETACHED NOTES

351

of them into the Sea. What Sea was for Moses and the Israelites, Jesus' death is for the Christians. But what the deliverance from Pharaoh and his hosts in the Sea and their safe passage through the Sea were for the Israelites, Jesus' death and rising again are for the Christians. If one were asked where we have an allusion in Mark's Gospel to Jesus' death as parallel to the Israelites passing through the Sea, one would have to point to Mark 10:38. This falls in the pericope Mark 10:35-45, where James and John ask Him (v.37) '"Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory."' Note this immediately follows the third prediction of His death which ends like the others 'and after three days he will rise' (v.34). Jesus asks them (v.38) if they are able to be baptized '"with the Baptism with which I am baptized.'" It could be that in v.30 we should make a distinction between Jesus' promise (v.39) '"The cup that I drink you will drink"' and His further affirmation in the same verse, '"and with the baptism with which I am baptized you will be baptized.'" They need not refer to the same thing. The first, the reference to the cup may mean the martyr's death that awaited them, the second, the baptism, may be a sharing in the baptism with which Jesus was to be baptized, i.e. His death. Rom. 6 :3 is important as showing how in Pauline thought baptism and Christ's death are closely associated, So to Rom. 6:4 'We were buried, therefore with Him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness oflife.' On the other hand 1 Cor. 10:1, is relevant as showing the connection between the figure of baptism and the Crossing of the sea. 'Our fathers', says Paul, 'were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 'In Jewish Law (cf. M. Miqwaoth 5 :4) the Sea could be regarded as a Miqwah or a Jewish baptistry. In these verses from Romans and 1 Corinthians we have baptism and Christ's death closely linked, and baptism into Moses and the Crossing of the Sea. It is hardly going too far to suggest that Christ's death referred to in Mark 10:38,39 as His Baptism would be seen as the New Exodus equivalent of the Crossing of the Sea in the Old Exodus. Van Goudoever (ibid. p. 170) did not apparently see this connection between Christ's death and the Crossing of the Sea, though he does adduce much evidence from the Early Church to show the relation between Resurrection and Baptism. He is indeed right (ibid. p. 170): 'The relation between Resurrection and baptism is perhaps not only a

352

DETACHED NOTES

question of theological speculation, but also a result of liturgical practice. Baptism was indeed administered during the night of the Resurrection.' One of the twelve Old Testament lessons, writes Van Goudoever (ibid. p. 171) 'read during the Easter Vigil is Exodus XIV, the crossing of the Sea, with or without the Song of Moses.' 'Origen', he points out (ibid. p. 171) 'quotes the three days of journey through the wilderness which were permitted by Pharaoh to Moses; these three days being a type of the three days between Death and Resurrection. The mystery of the third day is the Crossing of the Sea, a type of baptism,' says Origen. At the end of the Passover (rather Easter) Homily of Hyppolytus of Rome these words are said: 'give us the gladness to sing the victorious Song of Moses.' This is probably an indication that the Song of Moses, the song after the Crossing of the Sea, is sung in the service for the Easter Vigil.' The present writer thinks that Van Goudoever (ibid. p. 172) is probably right in suggesting that 1 Corinthians 'is connected with the Passover (and Easter) season.' If this is so, it is all the more significant that it is this Epistle and in ch. 10 thereof in particular, associated as it is with the crossing of the Sea, that Paul gives instruction on the blood and body of Christ, to be followed in ch. 11 :17ff with his tradition of the Dominican Institution thereof. If then the reference in the Baptism which our Lord was to undergo was His death and Resurrection conceived as parallel to the Crossing of the Sea in the Jewish Haggadah of the Exodus, there was no room for a Resurrection appearance at Jerusalem. Jerusalem with its Temple, its priests and its rabbinical scholars, and the Law which there held sway over the people, was the house of bondage from which He was redeeming His people. His death had been the ransom for many (cf. Mark 10:45). As He had said (Mark 14:28) '"after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee;"' and so it was, for as the young man at the empty tomb said (Mark 16:6) '"He has risen, He is not here; see the place where they laid him"' (v.7). "'But go tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him as he told you."' Mark's Gospel properly has no ending, for it is neverending. He is going before to the Kingdom of God. Is Galilee the actual Galilee? Yes and no. It was indeed in Galilee that He had first announced the Kingdom of God. It was the scene of His mighty works where He endowed with the spirit of God had challenged the dominion of Satan, and had been where the upholders of the Law had first challenged Him. Not only had He been shown to worsen

DETACHED NOTES

353

them there, but when they had been supported from their headquarters in Jerusalem, He had gone and in the citadel of the Law itself confounded Priest and Pharisee, and wrought there by His redemptive death and Resurrection, release for the people from their tyranny. All the hearers of this Gospel of God are invited to follow Him to Galilee. He the Son of Man is the New Israel, just as He is the first citizen of God's Kingdom. By identifying themselves with Him, they are freed from subjection to the Old Law and have a place in the new Israel, the Kingdom of God. But why has He gone ahead to Galilee? It is the Promised Land. Not only is it where He had declared the Kingdom but where they will have freedom to put into practice the New Law of the Kingdom with which He had been commissioned at the Mount of Transfiguration - '"listen to Him"' (Mark 9 :7). As we pointed out earlier (cf. p. 158) Mark in his Christian Passover Haggadah had to insert the New lawgiving before the deliverance by His Death and Resurrection. Mark, as it were, now turns its hearers' attention back to the beginning to Galilee, where He began; but now these who have heard Mark's Gospel and know who He was, are directed to hear it again. Then perhaps their ears and eyes will be opened. Then they will meet Him in His words and see Him in his acts of power as He really is. There is no ending to Mark. In the prolegomena we likened it to an arrow speeding towards its target, perhaps it would be better to liken it to a boomerang. But Galilee is not just the actual Galilee. It is the Promised Land, and it is our and every land. The Pharisees are ourselves and the Law they claim to uphold could be what we make of religion. Those oppressed by the Devil, the poor and the afflicted are with us today. The Gospel He preached freed their like once. Does the version thereof allowed by tradition oppress or alienate them today? Must we wait till He come to free mankind from the chains they have made of religion? No, His Spirit still speaks in the Marean Freedom Manifesto if we dare to let it speak.

Baraitha

DETACHED NOTE

J

A teaching or collection of Tannaitic teachings in the style and form of a midrash, but excluded from the canon of the Mishnah, presumably by Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi. Individual Baraithas are cited throughout the Talmud. The Tosefta which is about the same age as the Mishnah and compiled after the same overall pattern is the only

354

DETACHED LOTES

example of a Baraitha collection as a whole. It may have been that Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi gave semikh;i.h or ordination only to those students who would follow his Mishnah - and as a Rabbi he had a perfect right to demand such a prior condition (cf. Rambam Hilkoth Talmud Torah). That he was Patriarch in Palestine and descendant of Hillel would help in its acceptance as well. Darshan

Interpreter of, lecturer on the Law. The Darshan while originally applied to the expounder of the Law, as a teacher of Halakhah, early on could be applied to a preacher in general. Some Rabbis, bowing to popular demand could combine both halakhah and haggadah in their discourses. The title Darshan, preacher, was given to Shemaiah and Abtalion of the first century B.C. according to Rabbinic Tradition, leaders of the Sanhedrin in their day; (cf. also Jos. Ant. XIV. ix:3- Sameas and Pollion). They may have dealt not only with the halakhah but haggadah. Certainly the term derashah is applied to haggadic treatment of Scripture. M. Hag. 2:1; T.B. Sotah 49b; Midrash Gen. Rabba. V:2. Haggadah

Telling, communication, story; then homiletics, popular lecture as opposed Halakhah, legal interpretation. P.T. Peah II, 17a, 'we must not derive laws from homiletical interpretations.' With reference to Passover, the story of the Passover with the prayers and psalms at the Passover Service in the home. Hakham

Wise man, scholar. Hakham, a scholar's title. Jastrow-A Dictionary of the Targumin, the Talmud Babli and Y erushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature - Shapiro Valentine, London, 1926, p. 463, takes it as less than Rabbi. Halakhah

Practice, rule, either a traditional law or a traditional interpretation of a written law. Halakhah can also be used in a general sense of traditional law, tradition as a whole, or again of law specifically or legal interpretation as opposed to Haggadah.

DETACHED NOTES

355

Maggid Speaker, preacher. An itinerant preacher dealing with haggadic matters, more popular than the Darshan, who usually gave halakhic discourses. There is an interesting statement in T.B. Sotah 40a about R. Hiyya, the Darshan, and R. Abbahu, the Maggid. R. Hiyya's audience left him and flocked to R. Abbahu the Maggid. R. Abbahu appeased R. Hiyya's feelings by saying: 'We are like two merchants, one selling diamonds (i.e. halakhic discourses of the Darshan), and the other selling trinkets (i.e. the haggadic discourses of the Maggid) which are more in demand.' R. Meir of the midsecond century combined the functions of the Darshan and Maggid according to T .B. Sanh. 38b. In the Mishnah, Meir is praised for his parables (M. Sotah 9 :15). T.B. Baba Qamma 60b tells how R. Isaac Nappaha at least on one occasion to satisfy the opposing demands of his audience delivered a discourse containing both halakhah and haggadah. The Gemara itself contains both halakhah and haggadah, but the haggadah there is usually given to illustrate a halakhic point. The Maggid proper took as his starting point a Biblical verse of the Sidra (i.e. weekly Biblical reading from the Law). The Midrash Pesikta shows something of the type of weekly discourses of the Rabbi as Maggid. An attempt was made by Lowy: Bekoret ha-Talmud, p. 50, on the ground that Maggid Mishnah Zech. 9 :12 means 'the Maggid repeats' to suggest that the prophet in the Old Testament could be called a 'Maggid' but goes too far. On the other hand there could have been this aspect in the work of the Old Testament prophets (cf. Jer. ch.7 the Temple Sermon). Maggidism never died out in Judaism in fact, but in post-Talmudic times, and in the Middle Ages and later, rhe Maggid was a preacher of popular morality, sometimes revivalist and often inculcating the Messianic hopes. Meturgeman cf. Jastrow, ibid., p. 1695. Targem - to speak aloud, to deliver, proclaim, especially a) to explain, to interpret, b) (at divine service) to translate orally (in Aramaic) what has been read from the Scriptures in the original. Amoraim cf.Jastrow, ibid. p. 76. That class of Talmudic authorities who lived after the final redaction of the Mishnah and whose discussions on the opinions of the Tannaim, or authors of the Mishnah and Baraitha are Studia Post-Biblica vm

24

356

DETACHED NOTES

deposited in the Gemara, thus adding a second element to the development of the Oral Law called Talmud.

Mishnah 1) Repetition, teaching and learning orally by repeated recitation. 2) The Traditional Law taught and learned in this manner. 3) The Traditional Law as opposed to the Biblical Law. 4) The Mishnah, the collection of Oral Law edited by R. Judah ha-Nasi, c.200 A.D. 5) A section of the Mishnah, either one of the six sections or one of the subsections or Tractates making up any of these six sections, or a mishnah, any one of the halakhah in any such subsection or Tractate

Setam To state a halakhah in the Mishnah without naming the author.

Ta/mid Pupil, disciple.

Talmud Teaching, lesson, learning, study. Talmud can be applied to Scripture, cf. Talmud lomar: cf. T.B. Pes. 21b, referring to Deut. 14:21. Talmud usually means the Gemara, the discussions and decisions which in the case of the Babylonian Rabbinic Schools went on for 300 years, i.e. during the period of the Amoraim from c.200 A.D., when R. Judah ha-Nasi had edited his Mishnah. The term Talmud includes Mishnah as well as Gemara. It must be remembered that in the Talmud in the sense of Gemara (lit. completion) there is to be found the text of the Mishnah which is being commented on individual mishnah by mishnah. Talmud can mean study in general.

Tanna Aramaic Tana, to repeat, cf. Heb. Shanah. A teacher who taught the Oral Law by the Mishnah method of instruction or specifically Tanna is an authority in the Mishnah and/or Baraitha. The Tannaitic period is approximately the first two centuries of this era.

Targum Interpretation, translation, version, esp. Aramaic translation either

DETACHED NOTES

357

Peshat (literal) or translation with haggadic midrashic passages. On the Torah there are three Targums: 1) The Targum of Onkelos or Targum Babli, in Eastern Aramaic. It is the least paraphrastic. 2) The Fragmentary Targum; The Old Palestinian Targum or Targum Y erushalmi: Palestinian Aramaic, Haggadic Midrashic. 3) Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. In the language of Targum Onkelos but paraphrastic in the manner of the Fragmentary Targum to whose Haggadic Midrashim it is indebted. Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel on Joshua, Judges I & II Samuel I & II Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. In Eastern Aramaic. Paraphrastic: in many ways a Haggadic Midrash to these books. The above Targums, even Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan and Jonathan ben Uzziel though redacted in Babylonian Schools had their origins in Palestine. They are important for the history of Jewish Bible Exegesis and are repertory of the popular beliefs of early Judaism. They with the Haggadic Midrashim provide invaluable background source material for the study of not only early Judaism but New Testament Study. The Targum could be regarded as having something of the nature of a Midrash, and the Meturgeman in translating the Law and the Prophets into Aramaic, vice voce while it was read in Hebrew, in some way shared in the function of a Darshan. But in addition there was a place for preaching in the first century Synagogue, cf. Mark 1 :21; Matt. 4:23, Luke 4:15; 6:6; 13:10, John 6:59, 18:20; Acts 13:42; 15 :21. After the destruction of the Temple more space was probably given to it. R. Meir gave sermons on Friday evenings and Sabbath afternoons, cf. Lev. Rabba 9:9; P.T. Sotah 1 :16d. We know from the Gemara T.B. Pes. 50b; Hag. 14a, Meg. 23b, 24a; Moed. Qatan 21a; Ket. 8b; Sotah 37b; Sanh. 7b, that the expounder of the Law would address the congregation through a Meturgeman in preaching.

Torah Teaching. Specifically either the Torah or Written Law, i.e. the Pentateuch or the Torah she-Baal Peh or Oral Law or both.

Oral Law cf. Traditions of the Elders, (Mark 7 :3). Oral Law comprises in the widest sense not only the Mishnah and Gemara or Talmud which in

358

DETACHED NOTES

the main though not exclusively, are legalistic or halakhic, but also the Midrashim, both Halakhic Midrashim like Mekhilta on Exodus, Sifra on Leviticus, and Sifre on Numbers and Deuteronomy, and the Haggadic Midrashim like Midrash Rabba and Midrash Pesikta Rabbati on the other. The Oral Law like the Written Law does not deal exclusively with legal matters. Like the Written Law it has its stories, its haggadah.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABELSON, J., The Immanence of God in Rabbinical Literature, London, 1912. ABRAHAMS, I., Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, 2 vols. Cambridge, 1917-24. ALBERTZ, M., Die synoptischen Streitgespriiche, 1921. BACON, B. W., The Beginnings of Gospel Story, New Haven, 1909. - - , Is Mark a Roman Gospel? 1919. - - , Jesus and Paul, 1920. - - , The Gospel of Mark: its Composition and Date, New Haven, 1925. - - , The Making of the New Testament, London. BACHER, \V'., Tradition and Tradenten, Leipzig, 1914. BARDTKE, H., Der Traktat der Schreiber (Sopherim). - - , Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl Marx Universitiit Leipzig, 3 Jahrgang, 1953/54, Heft I, seiten 31-49. BERTRAM, G., Die Leidensgeschichte Jesu und der Christuskult, Giessen, 1922. BEARE, F. W., The Earliest Records of Jesus, Oxford, 1962. BEASLEY-MURRAY, G. R., Jesus and the Future - An Examination of the Eschatological Discourse Mark 13, with special Reference to the Little Apocalypse Theory, London, 1954. BLACKMAN, E. C., Biblical Interpretation, London, 1957. BLUNT, A. W. F., The Gospel According to St. Mark, with Introduction and Commentary, Oxford, 1935. - - , The Acts of the Apostles, Oxford, 1936. - - , The Gospels and the Critic, 1936. BoKSER, B. Z., Pharisaic Judaism in Transition. R. Eliezer the Great and Jewish Reconstruction after the War with Rome, New York, 1935. BoRNKAMM, G., Jesus of Nazareth, New York, 1960. BouSSET, W., Die Religion des Spiitjudentums in neutestamentischen Zeitalter, 3rd. ed. revised by R. Grossmann, Leipzig, 1926. BRANDON, S. G. F., The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church, London, 1951. BRIGHT, J., A History of Israel, S.C.M. Press, London, 1960. BROUGHTON, J., Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae, Rotterdam, 1636. BROWNLEE, W. H., Biblical Interpretation among the Sectarians of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Biblical Archaeologist XIV, pp. 54-76, 1951. - - , The Servant of the Lord in theQumran Scrolls II, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, CXXXV, 1954. BULTMANN, R., Jesus, Berlin, 1926. - - , Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition, 2nd. ed. Gottingen, 1931. BuRRows, MILLAR, The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark's Monastery, 2 vols. New Haven, 1950-1. BUCHLER, A., Die Priester und der Kultus im letzten Jahrzehnt des Jerusalemischen Tempels, Wien, 1895. - - , Das Synhedrion in Jerusalem und das Beth-Din in d•r Quaderkammer des Jerusalemischen Tempels, Wien, 1902. - - , Zur Geschichte des Tempelkultus in Jerusalem, Chwolson Festschrijt, Berlin, 1899, 1-41.

360

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BucHLER, A., The Law of Purification in Mark VII, 1-23, Expository Times, 1909, pp. 34-40. - - , Der Galiliiische Am ha-Ares des Zweiten Jahrhunderts. Beitriige zur inneren Geschichte des paliistinischen Judentums in den ersten zwei Jahrhunderten. Vienna, 1906. - - , Halakhoth le-Ma'aseh le-Bet Shammai bezeman ha-Bayith we-ahar ha-Hurban (Bloch Festschrift, II, pp. 21-30, 1905, Budapest. - - , The Economic Conditions of Judea after the Destruction of the Second Temple. London, 1912. - - , TheLeviticallmpurity of the Gentiles in Palestine before 70 ].Q.R.N.S. XVII, 1926. - - , Studies in Sin and Atonement in the Rabbinic Literature of the First Century, London, 1928. · CADBURY, H. ]., The Peril of Modernizing Jesus, New York, 1937. CARRINGTON, P., The Primitive Christian Calendar, Cambridge, 1954. CHARLES, R. H., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Oxford, 1913. CHWOLSON, Das Letzte Passahmahl Christi und der Tag seines Todes. Leipzig, 1908. CLOGG, B., An Introduction to the New Testament, London, 1937. CROSS, F. M., The Ancient Library ofQumran, New York, 1958. DALMAN, G., Jesus - Jeshua, Studies in the Gospel. 1929. DANBY, H., The Mishnah, Oxford, 1933. DANIELOU, J., The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, Baltimore, 1958. DAVIES, W. D., Paul and the Dead Sea Scrolls, in The Scrolls and the New Testament, ed. K. Stendahl, N.Y. 1956. DuPONT-SOMMER, A., Les Ecrits esseniens decouverts pres de la Mer Morie, Paris, 1959. DrnELIUS, M., The Structure and Literary Character of the Gospels, XX, 1927, 151-76. H.T.R. DrnELIUS, M., Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums, 1919. - - , From Tradition to Gospel, (a translation of 'Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums') 2nd. ed. by B. Lee Woolf, London, 1934. EASTORN, B. S., The Gospel before the Gospel, 1928. EDERSHEIM, A., The Life and Times ofJesus the Messiah, 2 vols. in one, London, 1906. FARRER, A. M., A Study in St. Mark, London, 1951. FASCHER, E., Die Formgeschichtliche Methode, Giessen, 1924. FINCH, R. G., The Synagogue Lectionary and the New Testament, London, 1939. FRIEDLANDER G. The Jewish Sources of the Sermon on the Mount, London, 1911. - - , Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, London, 1916. FINKELSTEIN, L., The Birkat ha-Mazon,].Q.R. N.S. XIX, 1928-29, 211-262. - - , The Pharisees, Their Origin and their Philosophy, H.T.R. XXII, 1929. 185-261. - - , La Kedouscha et !es benedictions, du Schema R.E.j. XCIII, 1932, 1-26. - - , The Institution of Baptism for Proselytes, J.B.L. LII, 1933, 203-11. - - , Akiba: Scholar Saint and Martyr. New York, 1936. - - , The Oldest Midrash: Pre-Rabbinic Ideals and Teaching in the Passover Haggadah. H. T.R. vol. XXXI, 1938. - - , The Sources of Tannaitic Midrashim, ].Q.R. 1946. - - , The Transmission of Early Rabbinic Tradition, H.U.C.A. 1941, p. 115ff. GASTER, M., The Samaritan Oral Law and Ancient Traditions, London, 1932. - - , The Book of Prayer, and the Order of Service, according to the Custom of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews. vol. V. The Order of Service For the Feast of Passover and the Feast of Weeks. London, 1906. GASTER, T. H., The Scriptures of the Dead Sea Sect, London, 1957. GooDSPEED, E. ]., A Life of Jesus, New York, 1956. GouDOEVER, ]AN VAN, Biblical Calendars, Leiden, 1959.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

361

GRANT, F. C., Form Criticism, Chicago, 1934. - - , The Earliest Gospel, New York, 1943. - - , The Gospels, their Origin and Growth, N.Y. 1957. - - , Ancient Judaism and the New Testament, London, 1960. GREEN, F. W., The Gospel According to St. Matthew, with Introduction and Commentary, Oxford, 1936. GREENFIELD, W., Novi Testamenti Graeci Tameion: A Concordance to the Greek New Testament abridged from the Edition of Erasmus Schmidt. Samuel Bagster & Sons, London. GRESSMANN, H., Der Messias. Gottingen, 1929. HAWKINS, J. C., Contributions to the Study of the Synoptic Problem. Oxford, 1899. HERFORD, R. T., The Pharisees, London, 1924. - - , The Significance of Pharisaism in Judaism and the Beginnings of Christianity. London, 1924. - - , Judaism in the New Testament Period, London, 1928. - - , Talmud and Apocrypha: A Comparative Study of The Jewish Ethical Teaching in the Rabbinical and Non Rabbinic Sources in the Early Centuries. London, 1933. HERKLOTS, H. G. G., 'A Fresh Approach to the New Testament, London, 1950. HIGGINS, A. J. B., New Testament Essays, Manchester, 1959. HucK, A., Synopse der Drei ersten Evangelien, Achte Auflage, Tubingen, 1934. }AMES, M. R., The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1924. JEREMIAS, J., Jerusalem zur Zeit Jesu, 2 vols. Leipzig, 1923-29; 1. Die Wirtschaftlichen Verhiiltnisse. 2. Die Sozialen Verhiiltnisse. A. Reich und Arm. B. Hoch und Niedrig. C. Lieferung. Die gesellschaftliche Oberschicht. - - , Die Abendsmahlworts Jesu, Gottingen, 1949. JosEPHUS FLAvrus, Opera, ed. B. Niese, 7 vols. Berlin, 1887-95. - - , Works. Greek text with English translation by H. H.]. Thackeray & R. Marcus. vol. I-V, 1926-35. London & Cambridge, Mass. vol. VI. R. Marcus, 1937. KAHLE, P. E., The Cairo Geniza, 2nd. ed. Oxford, 1959. KENYON, F. G., Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, 2nd. ed. London, 1926. KILPATRICK, G.D., The Origin of the Gospel according to St. Matthew, Oxford, 1946. - - , The Trial of Jesus, Oxford, 1953. KLAUSNER, J., Jesus of Nazareth, (trans. by H. Danby) London, 1929. - - , From Jesus to Paul, (trans. W. F. Stinespring) London, 1942. KNox, W. L., The Sources of the Synoptic Gospels, vol. 1, Cambridge, 1954. KOSMALA, H., Hebriier - Essener - Chrisler. London, 1959. KuHN, K. G., 'The Lord's Supper and the Common Meal at Qumran' in 'The Scrolls and the New Testament'. ed. Stendahl, pp. 65-93. KRAELING, C.H., John the Baptist, New York, 1951. LAKE, K., The Text of the New Testament, 6th. ed. revised by Silva New. London, 1933. LEEUW, G. VAN DER, Religion in Essence and Manifestation, trans. by J.E. Turner, London, 1938. LESZYNSKY, R., Die Pharisaer und Sadduzaer, Frankfurt, a.M. 1912. - - , Die Sadduzaer, Berlin, 1912. LEVI, L., The Attitude of the Talmud and the Midrash toward Proselytism (Hebrew), ha-Goren, IX, 1923, pp. 5-30. LIETZMANN, H., Messe und Herrenmahl, Bonn, 1926. - - , Der Prozess Jesu, Berlin, 1931. - - , The Beginnings of the Christian Church, (trans. B. Lee Woolf), London, 1937.

362

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIGHTFOOT, R.H., History and Interpretation in the Gospels, 1935. MAJOR, MANSON AND WRIGHT, The Mission and Message of Jesus, London, 1940. MANSON, T. W., The Teaching of Jesus, Cambridge, 1931. - - , The Servant-Messiah. Cambridge, 1954. MANSON, W., Jesus the Messiah: The Synoptic Tradition of the Revelation of God in Christ with special reference to Form-Criticism, London, 1948. McNEILE, A. H., Introduction to the New Testament, Oxford, 1927. MooRE, G. F., Judaism, 3 vols. Cambridge, 1927. MORRIS, L., The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, London, 1955. MowINKEL, S., He that cometh. New York, 1956. trans. by G. W. Anderson. MOWRY, LucETTA, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Early Church, Chicago, 1962. NESTLE, D. E., Novum Testamentum Graece cum apparatu critico curavit. Stuttgart, 1956. NORTH, C. R., The Old Testament Interpretation of History, London, 1946. NoTSCHER, F., Gotteswege und Menschenwege in der Bibel und in Qumran. Bonn, 1958. NOTH, M., The History of Israel, 2nd. ed. (trans. P. R. Ackroyd), London, 1959. PHILLIPS, G. E., The Transmission of the Faith, London. RABIN, CH., The Zadokite Documents, Oxford, 1954. RAWLINSON, A. E. J., The Gospel according to St. Mark, London, 1925. REDLICH, E., Form Criticism, Its Value and Limitations, 1939. RENGSTORF, K. H., Das Evangelium nach Lukas in dem Neuem Testament, (Deutsch, Gottingen), 1958. ROBINSON, J. M., The Problem of History in Mark, Studies in Biblical Theology, no. 21. S.C.M. Press, London, 1957. RowLEY, H. H., The Unity of the Bible, London, 1953. SANDAY, W., Studies in the Synoptic Problems, Oxford, 1911. ScHREIDEN, J., Les Enigmes des Manuscrits de la Mer Morie, Wetteren, 1961. SCHWEITZER, A., The Quest of the Historical Jesus, 1911. SCHMIDT, K. C., Der Rahmen der Geschichte Jesu, Berlin, 1919. SCHURER, E., Geschichte des Jiidischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, 4th. ed. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1901-11. SPARKS, H. F. D., The Old Testament in the Christian Church, London, 1944. STANTON, V. H., The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, Edin. 1886. - - , The Gospels as Historical Documents. STENDAHL, K. (ed.), The Scrolls and the New Testament, London, 1958. - - , The School of Matthew, Uppsala, 1956. STREETER, B. H., The Four Gospels: A Stu4J of Origins, Edin. 1936. - - , The Primitive Church. SCHWARZ, A., Die Controversen der Schammaiten und Hilleliten, Wien, 1893. - - , Victoire des Pharisiens sur /es Sadduceens en matiere de droit successoral. R.E.]. LXIII (1912) 57-61. TAYLOR, V., Formation of the Gospel Tradition, London, 1935. - - , The Gospels - A Short Introduction, London, 1952. - - , The Atonement in New Testament Teaching, London, 1940. VERMES, G., Scripture and Tradition in Judaism, Leiden, 1961. VISCHER, W., The Witness of the Old Testament to Christ, vol. 1, The Pentateuch. (trans. from the 3rd. German ed. by A. B. Crabtree), London, 1949. VOLZ, P., Jiidische Eschatologie von Daniel bis Akiba, Tiibingen und Leipzig, 1903. - - , Die Eschatologie der jiidischen Gemeinde im Neutestamentischen Zeitalter: Nach den Quellen der rabbinischen apokalyptischen und Apokryphenliteratur dargestellt. 2nd. ed. Tiibingen, 1934. STRACK, H. L., Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, Philadelphia, 1945.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

363

STRACK, H. L. & BILLERBECK, P., Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrash, 6 vols. Miinchen, 1961. WELLHAUSEN, J., Die Pharisaer und die Sadducaer, Griefwald, 1874. - - , Das Evangelium Marci, Berlin, 1903. - - , Einleitung in die Drei ersten Evangelien, Berlin, 1911. WEISS, J., Earliest Christianity, A History of the Period. A.D. 30-150, 2 vols. English Trans. ed. by F. C. Grant, N.Y. 1937. WERNER, M., Der Einfiuss paulinischer Theologie in Markusevange!ium, 1923. WESTCOTT AND HORT, The New Testament in Greek, London, 1909. WHISH, H. F., Clavis Syriaca, London, 1883.

INDEXES I. SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES 1. OLD TESTAMENT Gen.

1:1 1:2 1:14 1:15 1 :27 2: 1 2:2, 3 2: 19 2:20 2:24 3:7 3:21 7:7 8:21 8:22 9:4 9:6 13:3 15: 8-20 15:8 15:9 15: 13 15:14 15: 18 17:2£ 17: 19 17:21 18: 14 18:25 19:24£ 22:2 22:13 26:5 32:21 48:14 48:17 49 49:10 49: 11

59 n. 231 n. 271 n. 271 n.

p. 107 106n 76 76 209, 210 275 275 33 33 209,210 249 n. 3 249 n. 2 242 49 n. 1 76 168 n. 3 38 151 271n.1 1, 231 n. 1 1, 271 n. 1 1, 315 n. 1 1, 315 n. 1 79 79 79 79 323 70 77 108 77 269 n. 1 218 n. 2 145 145 225 225 225,270

Ex.

1:4 1 :14 2:24

264 332 269 n. 1

p. 109 3-4 81, 108 3-15 108 3:1-4:17 157,229 3:2£ 10, 18, 79,230,269 3:6 3:15 56, 79 3: 18 349 3: 19 349 3:20 79 109 4 4: 1 80 80, 113, 151 4:2 4:3 80 80, 113 4:5 80 4:6 80 4:9 4:17 80,82 4:21 80, 84, 110, 121 n. 3 4:22 110, 289 4:23 110 4:27 158 110 4:31 80 5 5:2 111 5:3 349 5:4 349 5:5 111, 115 n. 3 5:20 111 5:22 112 268 6:5 6:9 80 6: 18 343 7:3 76 81 7:5 7:9 80 7: 12, 13 80 7:15,16,17 80 80 7:18, 19,20 7:22 80 7:26 81 8:4 81 8:6 81 8:13 81 8: 14 81

Ex.

Ex.

8:15 8: 16 8:17 8:19 8:23 8:25 8:28 9:1 9:3 9:5 9:6 9:8 9:9 9:14 9:15 9: 16 9: 18 9: 19 9:26 9:27 9:30 10: 1 10:2 10:3 10:4 10:6 10:12 10:16 10:17 10:20 10:23 10:24 10:25 10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 11:2 11:3 11:4 11:7 11:8 11 :9 11: 10

P·

81, 82 84 84 84 349 112 84 84 82 84 85 84 84 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85, 121 n. 3 85 85 85 85 85 86, 136 136 86 86 80, 86 86 86 86 86, 121 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86

365

INDEXES

Ex. P· 268 12 100,247 12: 1ff 267 12:7 265 12: 10 81, 83, 124 12: 12 267 12:13 267 12:14 84 12:17 51 12:23 331 12:26 264, 332 12:27 212 12:35, 36 264, 332 12:39 12:42 78,92,250,277,278 171 12:48 264, 331, 332 13:8 331 13:14 192 13:21 352 14 121, n. 3 14:4 121, n. 3 14: 17 82 14:31 350 15 53 15:2 224 15:3 15:7 337 15: 18 56, 58 156 16:1 119 16:29 156 n. 1 18:21 124 18:25 158 19:3 177 19:10 177 19:11 158 19: 14 89 20:6 166, 213 20:12 213 20:12-16 213 20: 17 209 n. 2, 267, 268 21-23 21: 17 166 21:28 13 218,n.2,219 21:30 22:6 13 23:2 42 n. 1 24 87, 158 24:1 124 267 n. 1 24:5 24:6 266,267 24:7 266,267 24:8 262n.1,266,267n.1, 268,269,270

Ex. 24:9, 10 24:11 24:12 24:13 24:15 24:16 24:17 24: 18 30: 12 30: 19 31:14 32 40:10 40:31 40:34 40:38

p. 124 109 n. 1 190 190 190 190, 192 192 109, 192 218 n. 2, 219 n 163 n. 1 118 88 344 163 n. 1 192 192

Lev.

2:13 3:3,4 3: 17 6: 12 7:3 7:13 7:26 7:31 7:33 11: 1-47 14:4 15: 19ff 16:16 17:10 18: 16 19: 18 19:26 19:34 20:21 20:26 23: 11 24:16 25:24 25:32 25:51 25:52 26:38 26:42, 45 27:28

207 258 168 n. 3 37 37 37 168 n. 3 37 37 168 n. 2 113 146 n. 2 60 168 n. 3 154 230,232 168 n. 3 172 n. 3 154 165 259 292 219 n 56 219 n 219 n 63 269 n. 1 167 n

Num.

9:3 9: 12 11:4f

258 259 88

Num.

11: 17 11 :25f 11:27 11:28 11:29 12 14:1 14:2 14:3 15:37 15:38 15:39 15:40 15:41 16 16:1-25 18:8-20 20:8 20:2-13 21 :5 25: 1-9 35:31 35:32 25:11 25: 12 25:13

p. 125 152 206 206 206 206 88 88 88 74, 75 74, 75 74, 75 74, 75 74, 75 206 88 36 88 88 328 88 218 n. 2 218 n. 2 343 343 343

Deut.

1: 1ff 1:8 4:2 4:9 4:34 5: 16-20 6:4 6:4-9 6:5 6:13 6:20 6:23 8:3 11: 13f 11: 13-21 12-26 12:5 12:16 12:23 13: 1 13:2 13:2-6 13:3 13:4

209 n. 2 228 n. 2 324 326 82 213 230 74, 211 230,232 13 331 333 9, 13 74, 211 74 209 n. 2 334 168 n. 3 168 n. 3 324 77, 193, 242 178, 242, 292 77 77

366 p. 13:5 77 13:6 178, 193 249 n 13:7-9 13:8 250 151 13:18 168 n. 2 14: 1-20 14: 1 38 15 :17 56 15:23 168 n. 3 16:3 75 16:16 13 17:6 288 17:7 288 209 n. 2 17: 18 17: 19 37 18:15 12, 193 18:18 5, 12, 123, 153, 178, 194 18:19 178, 193 18:20 178, 193, 285 n 18:21 77, 178 18:22 77, 178 21:22 308 n. 1, 309 n 21 :23 308 n.1 23:26 118 24: 1-4 209 24:1 209,210 25:5 120,228 25:6 120,228 25:7 120 25:8 37, 120 25:9 120 25: 10 120 26 89 26:5ff 264,269,332 26:6-9 89 26:8 81 27 342 27:28 269 n. 1 28 342 30: 1 242 30:4 9,242,250 30: 15 30 30:16 30 30: 19 49,n. 1 31:16 228 n. 2 31:21 49 n. 1 32 247 32:35 247 32:39 147 32:40 56 33:4 54, 70 Deut.

INDEXES

Joshua

1:8 10:10-14 24

p. 326 76 332

Kings

19:8 19: 10 21

p. 343 197 341

2Kings

judges

2:1, 2 3:5 3:6 5:20 8:23 9:6

88 88 88 76 58 58

1 Sam. 2:31 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:20 10:3f 12:3 12: 12 16:14f 21:6 21 :2-9 22:9 22:18 25:29

5 58 58 58 58 257 218 n. 2 58 47 10 117 117 117 42

2Sam.

6:6 6: 12-20 7: 1-3 7: 12 7:13 7:14 7: 16 7:23 7:24 7:25 7:29

283 335 335 93 93, 106, 107, 335 93, 107 107 107 107 107 107

1 Kings 2:27 8 14:21££ 15:23 17 17:6 17: 14 18 19 19:2

5 335 335 335 341 77 155 341 341 197

1 1:2 1 :2ff 1:3 1:6 1:10 1:16 2 4: 1-7 19:35 1 Chron. 15:1-16:43 21: 15 21: 16 22: 2-19

341 127, 128, 346 127,323 127 197 127 128 341 155 77 335 47 82 335

2Chron.

3:1-5:1 12: 1-16 13:22 14: 9-15 24:27 36:21 Ez.

7: 12 Neb.

9: 7-38 9:8 9:9 9: 10 9:13 9:14 9:15 Esther

2:22 7:8

Job

26:9 37:4 37:5 37:6 38:8

335 335 334 335 334 5 334 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 40 292 110 n. 1 76 76 76 142

367

INDEXES

Job

38: 11 41 42:2 Ps.

p. 142 142 323

2:7 73, 105, 108, 193, 234, 289,290 2:8 73 6:9 13 8:2, 5 110 n. 1 110 n. 1 8:10 10:16 56 93 16:8-11 184 n. 1 16:8,9 16:10 94, 111 16:11 94 18:31:i 234 21 :5 73 22 19, 22, 217, 282 22:2 8 22: 18b 7 22:19 7, 8 26:6 163 n 34:21 8 37:32, 33 50 41 :10 6, 7, 261, 262 n. 277 42:6 262 n. 1 189 49:6 189 49:7 49:8 189,218 n. 2, 219 n 189 49:9 270,271 50:5 55:24 39 270 63:2 242 65:8 56 66:7 270 68:7 70 n. 1 68:13 110 n. 1 68:19 282 69 87 78:7 78:11 87 78:12 87 87 78: 12-53 87 78:42 78:43 87 78:42-51 87, 88 78:49 47,83 87 78:61-64 242 79: 1 80:18, 19 248 n. 1 81 :10 50

p. 89:2 56 89:4 107 107 89:5 89:21 289 289 89:27 89:28 289 52 91 :4 92:9 56 104 76 105 88 105:9 88 105:23 88 105:27 88 105:27-36 88 105:28 88 105:38 88 105:39 88 105:40 88 105:41 88 88 105:43 106 88 106:7 88 106:16 210 210 106:32 106:33 88, 210 88 106:34-46 106:41 88 89 106:47 107:1 173 110: 1 94, 234, 235, 262 n. 1, 290 113-118 91,258,264,333 264 113-114 333 115-118 115: 16 192 n.1 56 115 :18 258 116: 1 9, 10, 18, 223 118:22 10, 18, 223 118:23 223 118:25 12 118:26 56 119:142 56 121:8 93 132: 10 93, 107 132: 11 93 132: 12 333 137 56 138:8 123 n. 4 139:5 56 145: 13 173 146:8 56 146: 10

Ps.

Prov.

4:2 6:35 7:25,26 8:21 13:8 21:18

p. 38 218 n. 2 328 39 218 n. 2, 219 n 219 n

Eccles.

3:11 S. of S.

1:3 2: 10ff 2: 11-13 2:11 2:13 2: 17 7:11 Isa.

56 70 n. 1 116, 247 221 100 247,323 247 228 n. 2

63 1-39 129 2:4 223 5: 1ff 5: 18 74 144 6:5 136, 137, 138 6:9 121, 136, 137, 181 6: 10 123 n. 4 11:2 53 11: 16 53 12 53 12:2 53 12:5 91,247 13 13:1-14:23 63 91,247 13:6-11 247 13:8 246,247 13:9 13:10 242,246,247 241,242 19:2 63 20 174 22:26 23 63 24 64 63 24-27 24:17 242 63 24:19 24:21,22,23 64 26:2 70 49 n. 1 26:3 26:4 56 228 n. 2 26:19 27:13 242

368 Isa.

INDEXES

p.

29:13 9, 18, 166 29: 18 12, 172 29: 19 12 34 173,247 34:2 247 34:4 242,246,247 34:5 247 34:6 247 34:8 247 247 34:16 12, 172, 173 35:5 12, 172, 173 35:6 173 35:10 218 n. 2 38: 18 128 40-43 40-56 63 40-66 63 270 40:2 40:3 8, 10, 11, 12,64, 105 40:4 11, 12, 64 40:5 11, 64 40:28 56 42:1 108, 193, 234, 290 129 42:7 43:3 218 n. 2, 219 n 128 43:11 350 43: 16 43:17 350 43:37 219 n 44:7 55 45:7 47 45: 17 56 47:11 218 n. 2 48:22 42 49:6 60,61 49; 7-26 61 49:9, 10, 11 213 213 49:22-26 49:23 61 50:6 292,308 50:7 292 51:9 78, 350 51:10 78, 350 51; 11 78,350 51:22 217 52: 10 12 52: 13-53: 12 69 52:13 67, 289 52: 15 61, 71, 315 53 62, 64, 69, 72, 108, 183, 248 n. 1, 262, 278,282,297,345

p,

Lam.

53:1-10 69 53: 1 6, 67 53:2 67, 68, 69 53:3 196 53:4 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 196 53:5 68,69,304 53:6 61,66, 70,297 53:7 68, 70, 71, 262 n. 1, 281,289,292,293,302 53:8 66, 67, 68, 71, 299 53:9 67-69,71,183,184 53:10 61,66,68, 183 53:11 66,68, 183,219 53: 12 19, 67, 68, 72, 73, 219 54:8 56 55:1 50 56:7 ~ 18 57-66 63 57:2 42 59:19 13 61; 1 12 63:9 55 63:11 55 63:11-14 53 63:18 242 64:4 229 n 66:24 207

1:9 2:9 4:21

Isa.

fer. 2: 11 7:11 7:14 10:10 12:7 18:2 19:1 19: 10 20: 17 22:5

128 9,18 117, 240 56 13 299 29 29 56 13

n:~

~

24:4, 5 59 24:6, 7 59 25:11 5 26:6 240 26:8 240 28: 10 29 31; 3 56 31: 31, 32 266, 267 n. 1, 269 32:7 299 32:17f 89 32: 19-22 89 32:23 89

60 106 n 217

Ezek. 1 1:5 1:26 4:3 9:2 9:4ff 9:6 10 10: 18 11:16 11:22 16:32 17:22, 23, 24 21:9 31:3 31 :4, 5 34:2 40-48 43:4, 5 45:17

31 109 124 59 51 51 70 n. 1 239 239 59 245 189 138 70 n. 1 67, 69 69 155 59 252 n. 4 233

Dan.

2

55 2:28 241,242 4:9 13, 138 4: 18 13, 138 7 33, 55, 248 n. 1 7:9 109 7:10 291 7: 13 92, 109, 188, 242, 245, 248 n. 1, 249, 262 n.1, 278,290,291 7:14 247 8: 13 242 9:24 56 9:26 240n.2 9:27 241,245 11:31 245, 246,247 11 :41 (LXX) 241 12 246 12: 1 241, 243, 246, 247 12:4 246 12:9 246 241,244,245,246 12:11 Hosea 2:4

189

369

INDEXES

Hosea

6:1 6:2 9:7 Joel

3:3

p. 183 183, 184,349 242

137 218 n. 2 S8 SS S8 SS S8

Micah

3: 12 4:7 4:8 S:1 6:4 7:6 7:7 7:14

2:3

240 S6 2S2 n. 3 SS 89 37,241,243 243 SS

p. 42 n. 1

Haggai

1:8 82

AmfJs

3:7 S:12 7: 17 8:2 9:7 9: 11 7: 17

Hab.

60

Zech.

1 :20 270 2:10 9,242,270 3:1 S3 3:2 S3 3:8 270 3: 10 270 4:7 270 4:10 270 6:12 270 7:13 270 8:6 73,270,323 8:7, 12 270 8:23 270 9: 1 270 9:9 6,22S,270 262 n. 1, 266, 268, 9:11 270,271 9: 11-13 270

p. 9: 12 3SS 10:4 270 11 :10 271 11:12 221, 2S6, 270, 299 11 :13 299 12:3 (LXX) 242 12: 10 8, 73, 74, 270 12: 12 73, 74 13:7 9, 18, 262 n. 1, 270, 27S,276,281 14: 1 224 14:2 270 14:3 224 14:4 224 14:7 270 14:8 270 14:9 270

Zech.

Mal.

1: 11 13 3:1 8, 10-12, 10S, 343 3:4 SS 3:22 130 n. 3, 197, 342 3:23 1S, 196, 197,341,342 3:24 197' 342, 343, 34S

2. NEW TESTAMENT Matt.

2: 1-12 2: 13 2:14 2: 16 2:17 2: 18 2: 19 2:23 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:11 3:16, 17 4:4 4:6 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:23 5-7 5: 3-12

p. 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 23 n. 2 11 34S 11 11 108 9 281 187 187 187 187 3S7 90 90

Matt.

s: 13, 1S s: 18

S:25 5:26 5:31,32 5:38-48 6: 9-1S 6:19-21 6:22,23 6:24 6:25-34 7: 1-S 7:7-11 7: 12 7:13 7: 14 7: 15-20 7:23 7:24-27 8-10 8: 17 8:25

p. 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 196 141

Matt.

9:27 9:28 9:29 9:30 9:31 10 10:1 10:3 10:5 10:6 10:10 10:13 10:16-23 10:20 10:23 10:32 10:38 10:39 11:3 11: 7-15 11:7-19 11: 10

p. 220 220 220 220 220 150 150 114 243 243 150 151 243 243 243 187 187 187 11 12 15 11

370 p. 15,345 11: 13 11:14 15,196,341,343,345, 346 15 11:15 12 11: 19££ 250 11:27 303 12:1 10 12:3 135 n. 4 12:22-24 180 12:38-42 180, 189 12:39 57 13:22 23n. 2 13:44 23 n. 2 13:45 23 n. 2 13:47 148 13: 54-58 154 14:1-12a 23n. 2 14:28 23n. 2 14:29 23 n. 2 14:30 23 n. 2 14:31 167 n 15 :5 174 15:39 180 16:1 180 16:2 180 16:3 180 16:4 181 16: 12 186 16: 17 186 16:18 186, 191 16:19 185 16:20 16:21 184,204,348 16:22 184 184 16:23 187 16:24 188 16:25 190 17:1 17:2 190 191 17:3 192 17:5 17:10 15, 195, 196 17:11 195, 196,342 17:12 195, 196 17:13 195, 196,341 198, 199 17:14 17:15 198, 199,202 198 17:16 17:17 198, 200, 201, 203 198,202 17:18 201 17:20 184 17:22

Matt.

INDEXES

p. Matt. 184,204,348 17:23 23n.2 17:24 23n.2 17:25 23 n. 2 17:26 23 n. 2 17:27 205 18:4 23 n. 2 18:23-35 208 19:1 208 19:2 208, 210 19:3 210 19:4 210 19:5 210 19:6 210 19:8 210, 209 n. 1 19:9 210 19:10 210 19: 11 210 19:12 212,215 19:27 23n.2 20:1-16 184 20:18 20:19 184, 185, 217, 348 217 20:20 219 n 20:24 220 20:29 220 20:30 219, 220 20:31 220 20:32 220 20:33 220 20:34 221 21: 1-11 223 21:9 226 21:12 221 21 :12-22 221 21:23-27 23 n. 2 21 :28-32 221 21 :33-46 10 21:42 23n. 2 22:1-14 228 22:19 299 22:15-22 226 22:15 208 22:16 10 22:32 230 22:36 230 22:40 230,232 22:41 229 22:41-46 234 22:43 30, 160 23 236 23:1 336 23:2£

p. Matt. 164, 235, 236 23:2 23:3 236 23:5 35 236 23:6 236 23:7 236,237 23:13 23:14 237, 237 n. 1 23:15 172n. 2,236 23:23 31 23:25 236 236 23:27 23:29 236 198 23:37 24:1 239 241 24:3 243 24:4-11 241 24:6 24:7 241 24:10 241 241 24:15 241 24:21 242 24:24 243 n. 1 24:26-28 242 24:29 242 24:30 242 24:31 252 24:33 250 24:35 250 24:36 250 24:37-41 250 24:42 251 24:43-44 251 24:45-51 23n.2 25: 1-13 23 n. 2, 251 25:14-30 48 25:41 255 26:1 255 26:2 255 26:3 255 26:8 256 26:13 23 n. 2, 256, 270, 26:15 299 260 26:17-19 6 26:21 17,262 26:24 26, 261, 262 26:25 266,271 26:28 275 26:31 276 26:32 276, 295 26:34 295 26:35

INDEXES

Matt. 26:36 26:37 26:39 26:42 26:47 26:48 26:49 26:50 26:51 26:52 26:53 26:54 26:55 26:56 26:57-68 26:58 26:59 26:60 26:61 26:63 26:64 26:65 26:66 26:67 26:68 26:69 26:71 26:72 26:73 26:74 26:75 27:1 27:2 27: 3-10 27:4 27:6 27:7 27:12 27:16 27:17 27: 19 27:20 27 :23-25 27:24 27:25 27: 27-31 27:30 27:35 27:37 27:39 27:52 27:53

p. 276 277 281 279 279,281 279,281 26, 281 280,281 281 281 281 281 281 280,281 292 292 292 292 292 292 292 298 293 293 292,293 255 n. 2, 295 295 296 295,296 296 296 298, 298 n. 1 298 n. 1 23 n. 2, 299 299 299, 300 299 305 303 303 304 304 306 305 305 308 308 7 241 241 23 n. 2 23 n. 2

Studia Post-Biblica

VIII

Matt. 27:64 27:65,66 28:2 28: 11-13 28:16

p. 23 n. 2, 348 23 n. 2 348 23 n. 2 276

Mark 160 1 1: 1 9, 10, 105, 111n.1, 345 8, 11, 12, 105 1:2 8, 11, 105 1:3 9, 10, 105, 152,345 1:4 105 1:5 105 1:6 11, 105 1:7 10, 11, 105, 152 1:8 106 1:9 1:10 106, 149 106, 149, 192, 193 1:11 106 1: 12 106, 109, 187 1:13 1:14 110, 154, 188, 278n2 348 188, 278 n. 2 1:15 1: 16-20 111 113, 214, 357 1:21 1:22 13 200 1:23 141, 173 1:25 1:24 124 125, 127, 149, 232, 1:27 251, 251 n. 1 1:32 112 1:33 112 1:34 112, 153 1:37 112 1:38 112 1:39 112 1: 40ff 113 2:5 117 2:7 149 113, 195 2:8 2:10 114, 249 n 2:13£ 114 2:16 126 2:17 115 2:18 115, 126, 345 2:19 116 2:20 116 2:21-22 116 116 2 :23ff 117 2:24

371 Mark p. 2:25 10, 18, 233 2:26 10 2:28 248 n. 1 3 160,200 3: 1-6 118, 208 3:2 118 3:4 118, 120 3:5 121, 136 3: 6 118, 121, 122, 153, 161 181 3:7 122, 132 3:7-12 122 3:9 132 3:11 123 3:12 124 3:13 157 3:13-19 124 3:14 124 3:15 124 3: 18 114 3:20ff 126 3:21 126 3:22 125, 127, 142, 149, 161, 178, 196, 345 3:22-30 126, 177, n. 1, 303 3:23 127 3:24 131 3:24-27 134 3:27 131 3:29 106 3:30 106 3:31 126 3:33f 149 3:34 127 3:35 127 124, 165, 182 4 4: 1-9 131 4: 1-34 131, 135 4:1 132 4:2 132 4:3 138 134 4:9 136, 139, 182 4: 10-12 131 4: 10-20 134 4: 10-25 20 n. 1, 138, 139 4:12 149, 172, 179, 181 131 4: 13 142 4: 15 131, 134, 138 4:21-25 134 4:21-32 134 4:21 25

372 Mark P· 138 4:23 4:26-28 252 n. 1 131, 134, 138 4:26-29 134 4:26ff 4:30-32 131, 134, 252 n. 2 138 4:30-34 116, 131, 139 4:33-34 4:35 141, 143 4:36ff 134, 143 4:38 121 n.1 142 4:39 143 5:1 143 5:3 143 5:4 143 5:5 143 5:7-9 144 5:13 144 5:18 144 5:19 144 5:20 145 5:21 5:23 147 5:25f 159 5:26 145 146 5:30 5:34 146,220 5:35-43 147 5:35 147 5:38 147 5:39 147 5:41 147 5:42 147 5:43 147 6 125 6:1 122 6:2 122 6: 1-6 148 6:3 148 6:4 149 6:5 145, 148 6:6 121 n. 1 6:7 106, 125, 150,203 6:7-13 150 6:9 150 6:12 151 6:13 151,203 6:14 152 6: 14-29 152 6:15 153, 198 6:16 153 6: 17 154 6:17-29 198

INDEXES

Mark p. Mark p. 154 8:6, 7 6: 19, 20 176 155 8:11 6:22 174, 178,242 154 8:12 121n.1, 179, 180 n. 1 6:24 156 8:15 6:30 180 155 8:17 121 n. 2, 136, 180 6:30-44 121n.1 8:18 6:31 181 156 8:19,20 6:33 174 121 n. 1, 155 8:21 6:34 181 175 8:22-26 6:36 173, 182 156, 175, 176 8:22 6:37 222 156 8:24,25 6:38 182 99, 156 8:27-10:45 6:39 186 156, 175 8:27 16, 160, 183 6:40 156 8:27ff 188 6:41 157, 160 8:27-38 6:45 183 158 8:28 16, 188, 198 6:46 157 8:29 16, 153, 176,220 6:47 121 n. 2, 136, 159, 8:30 16, 153, 185, 186 6:52 170 8:31 16, 17, 114, 152, 176, 6:54 159 183, 184, 188, 195, 204, 6: 53-56 30, 113, 125, 160, 161, 228,297,348 7 164, 169, 170, 181,336 8:31-32 297 161 8: 31-33 7:1 200 162 8:31-37 7:2 188 160, 162 8:32 7: 1-23 16, 184, 186,297 161, 164, 336 8:33 121 n. 1, 126, 184, 7:3 161 200 7:4 9, 17, 196, 236 8:34 7:6 187, 188 166 8:34-39 7:8 187 166, 167 n., 300 8:35 188 7: 11 170 8:36,37 7:15,16 189 168 8:38 7: 15-23 188, 189 169 189 9:1 7: 18 170, 172 9:2-13 190 7: 19 9:2 169 7:21-23 190,348 169 9:3 192 7:22,23 122, 170, 173, 17 4 9:4 191 7:24 170 9:5 26 7:24-30 171 192,277 9:6 7:27 171, 177 9:7 192, 193,353 7:28 171, 172 9:9 15, 194, 200 7:29 171 194-196 9:10-13 7:30 182 9: 10 15, 195, 196, 200 7:31-34 15, 195-197, 345 172 9:11 7:31-37 121 n. 1 9: 12 16, 17, 194, 196, 197, 7:33 121n.1, 173 198,342,345 7:34 173 9: 12a 7:36 196 172 9:12b 7:37 195, 196 9:13 17, 194, 196-198, 345, 160 8 155, 174, 177 346 8: 1-10 195-197 175 8:2-4 9:13b 175, 176 9: 14-29 8:4 198,200

373

INDEXES

Mark 9:14 9:15 9:16 9: 17 9: 18 9:19 9:20 9:22 9:23 9:24 9:26 9:27 9:28 9:29 9:30 9:31

p.

198, 199,202 198,199,277 199 201,202 201,202 200,203 201 201,202 201 201 201 201, 203 200,203 16,200,203 203 16, 17, 183, 184 195, 348 184, 204, 217 9:32 205 9:33 9: 33-37 204, 211, 212, 216, 218 195 9:34 9:35 121 n. 1, 205, 206 195, 218 9:35ff 121 n. 1, 206 9:36 206 9:37 206 9:41 206 9:42 207 9:43 207 9:45 207 9:47 20,207 9:48 207 9:49 207 9:50 211 10:1-12 209 10:2 136, 209, 210 10:5 210 10: 6-8 14 n. 2, 210 10: 11 14 n. 2, 210 10: 12 211 10:13 211, 212, 218 10:13-16 121n.1 10:14 232 10: 15 232 10: 16 211,212 10:17-31 213 10: 18 121 n. 1, 213, 214 10:21 277 10:22 215 10:24 215 10:26 270,323 10:27

Mark 10:28 10:29 10:30 10:31 10:32 10:32-34 10:3316,17, 10:34 16, 17,

p.

212, 214, 215 215 215 215 121 n. 1, 216 16, 17 184, 195,256 185, 195, 217 348 204 10: 35, 36 212 10:35-37 216, 218, 351 10: 35-45 351 10:37 217 n. 2, 279, 351 10:38 279 10:39 218 10:42 10:45 218, 219 n, 315, 352 233 10:47 219,233 10:48 221 11:1-11 270 11: 2-7 225 11 :2 223,233 11:10 226 11 :11 221 11:12-25 121n.1, 226 11:12 247 11: 13 226 11 :15-12:44 241 11: 15-19 9, 18, 196 11:17 226 n. 1 11:18-19 247 11 :20 26, 191,247 11:21 225, 241, 285 n 11:27 235 11:27-32 221, 222, 229 11:27-33 251 n. 1 11 :28 223 11 :29 255 11:32 237 12 221,223 12: 1-12 9, 18, 223 12:10 223 12:11 18, 226 12: 12 229,299 12:13-17 121, 181, 208, 226 12:13 227 12:14,16 14 n. 2, 227 12: 17 228,229.230 12: 18-27 74,228 12:25 10, 18, 229, 269 12:26 12:28-34 229,230,235,303

Mark p. 230 12:29 12:31 230,231 231 12:32 12:34 232, 238 12: 35-37 219, 229, 232, 235 290 12:35 12:36 234,235 12:38-40 229, 235, 236 12:38 236,237 12:39 236, 237 12:40 235, 236, 237, 241 229,237 12:41-44 238 12:42 13 20, 21, 189, 198, 241, 244,246,251,310 239 13:1-37 13: 1 239 13:1, 2 239 n. 1 242,245,288 13:2 13:4 241,242,245 242 13:5-13 241,242 13: 5-27 13: 5-37 243 n. 1 242 13:6 13:6-8 239 n. 1, 243 n. 1 20,241,242 13:7 20, 241, 242 13:8 13:9-13 127,243 243 13:9 243, 244 13:10 243 13:11 20,241 13:12 244 13:13 13:14 20, 241, 244 n. 1, 2 245 & n. 2, 246 13: 14-20 239 n.1,243 n.1,244 244 13: 14-22 20,241,246 13:19 246 13:20 242 13:21 13:22 20,242 13:24 20, 242, 246, 247, 348 13: 24-27 239 n. 1, 243 n. 1 250 13:24-25 13:25 20, 242, 246, 247 13:26 20, 189, 198, 241, 242, 243, 245, 249, 250, 252,262,278,290 9, 20, 189, 242, 13:27 243,250,270 247 13:28

374

INDEXES

p. p. Mark 277, 278 247,252 14:42 13:29 279, 285 n 250 14:43 13:30 279 250 14:43-52 13:31 279 189,250 14:44 13:32 26, 191 250 14:45 13:33 280 251 14:46 13:34-37 18, 281 251 14:48 13:35-37 252 14:49 18, 19,226,280,281 13:36 281 348 14:50 1, n. 254 254, 14:1 281 255,287,348 14:51 14:2 281 255 14:52 14:3-9 288, 285 n 255 14:53 14:4 292 255 14:53-56 14:5 286 256 14:53-63 14:7 284,287 256 14:53-65 14:9 284 n. 1 256 14:55 14:10 284n.1 256 14:55-65 14: 11 288 257,258,260 14:56 14: 12 288 257 14:57 14: 12-26 288 260 14:58 14:13 289,292 257, 260, 275 14:59 14:14 289,291 260, 261 14:60 14:16 252, 262 n. 1, 290 261 14:61 14:17-21 252, 262 n. 1, 290 261,262,278 14:62 14: 18 307 16, 263, 266 14:63 14:20 14:21 16, 17, 196, 262, 280 14:64 284 n. 1, 292, 293, 298,307 102,263,265 14:22 292,293 273 n. 2 14:65 14:22-25 295 262 14:66 14:22-26 295 263,265,277 14:67 14:23 295 102, 262 n. 1, 14:68 14:24 296 266, 267, 269, 270, 271, 14:69 242 278 14:68 295,296,348 275 14:70 14:25 296 14:26 223,266,275,276 14:71, 72 298, 323 14:27 9, 18, 196, 262 n. 1, 15 270,275,281 15:1 285 n, 297-299, 303 302,305,307 275 15:2 14:27-31 302,303 276,309,348 15:3 14:28 302,305 276,295 15:4 14:30 302 276, 295 15:5 14:31 302 276 15:6-15 14:32 303 276 15:8 14:32-42 303,304 277 15:9 14:33 303,304 262 n. 1 15:10 14:34 303,304,305 278 15: 11 14:35 303 217,278 15:12 14:36 303 252,277 15: 14 14:37 303,304,308 277 15:15 14:38 308 279 15:16-19 14:39 7 277 15:24 14:40 19 277,278 15:28 14:41

Mark

Mark

15:29 15:38 15:40 15:42-47 15:42 16 16: 1-9 16:4 16:5 16:6 16:8 16:9-20 16:12, 13 16: 14 Luke

P·

288 310 308 308 254 230 309 261, 311 277,281 277,309,349 230, 311 282 n. 1 282n.1 136,261

96 1:1 96 1:3 23n.2 1 :5-25 345 1:17 23 n. 2 1 :26-38 23 n. 2 1: 39-56 24n 2: 1-20 255 n. 1 2:1 261 2:7 24n 2:21 24n 2:22-39 24n 2:40 24n 2:41-50 151 2:49 11, 255 n. 1 3:2 11 3:3 11, 12 3:4 11, 12 3:5 12 3:6 11 3:7-18 11, 12 3:15 11 3:16 12 4:1-13 357 4: 15 148 4: 16-30 341 4:25 23n2 5:1-11 10 6:3 357 6:6 90 6:20-23 90 6: 27-30; 32-36 90 6:31 90 6:37-42 90 6:43, 45 90 6:47-49 23 n. 2 7:11-17

INDEXES

Luke p. 7: 18 11 7:22 12 12 7 :24-28 11, 12 7:27 24n 7 :36-50 255 7:39 24n 8: 1-3 8:24 141 150 9:1, 3, 4 151 9:6 287 9:7-9 273 n. 2 9:16 184 9:20-22 185 9:21 184, 185, 204, 348 9:22 187 9:23, 23-27 187, 188 9:24 9:26 187 190, 191 9:28 191 9:29, 30 191, 194 9:31 194 9:36 198 9:37-43 198, 199 9:37 199 9:38 202 9:39 9:41 200,203 9:44 184,204 9:45 184, 185, 204 205 9:46-48 24n 9:51-56 9:54 341 152 10:1-10 24n 10: 1-20 282 10: 18 10:25 230,232 10:26 230 10:28 232 24n 10:38-42 90 11:1-4, 9-13 11: 14-16 135 11: 16 160 11:29 160, 189 90 11: 33, 34-36 237 11 :37-52 11 :43 237 12:1 160, 181, 187 12:8,9 187 12:22-31 90 12:33, 34 90 12:50 217 12:57-59 90

Luke p. 237 12:59 300 13: 1-4 24n 13: 1-5 221 13: 6-9 23 n. 2 13: 10-17 13: 10 257 13:19 13 13:23, 24 90 13:27 13, 90 13:29 13 13:31 208 14 13:33 13:35 12, 13 14: 1-6 23 n. 2 90 14:34,35 16:8 57 16: 13 90 16: 17 90,250 16: 18 90,208 17:5 221 221 17:6 23 n. 2 17:11-19 243 n. 1 17: 23-24, 37 250 17:26-37 13 17:27 17:29 13 17:32 13 187 17:33 217 18:31-34 18:31 184, 185, 194 18:32 184, 185 18:33 184, 185, 348 18:34 185 18:35 220 219 18:39 220 18:43 24n 19:1-10 251 19:11-27 221 19:28-44 223 19:38 24n 19:41-44 226 19:45 221 19:45-49 240 20 221 20: 1-8 221 20: 9-19 10 20:17 226 20:20 299 20:20-26 228 20:24 227 20:26 229 20:34-36

375 Luke p. 229 20:36 10 20:37 232 20:39 232 20:40 234,235 20:42 236 20:45-47 20:46 235,237 237 20:47 250 21 237 21:2 240 21:5 241 21:7 242 21:9,10 252 21 :20-24 242 21:22 242 21:24 ~1 242 21:25 ; j 242 21:26 242 21 :27 252 21:31 250 21:33 242 21:35 250,251 21:36 21:37 221,240 240 21:38 293 22 255 22:1, 2 260 22:7,8 260 22:7-13 261 22:14 259 22: 15, 16 266, 266 n. 1, 267 22: 19 22:20 266n.1,267,269,271 6 22:21 17, 261, 262 22:22 261 22:23 205,217,218 22:24-27 276 22:31 276 22:32 276 22:33 276,295 22:34 282 22:36, 38 279 22:39-46 262 22:22 24n 22:42-44 279 22:43 279 22:46,47 281 22:47-53 279,282 22:48 23,282 22:49-51 281 22:52 282 22:53, 54

376 Luke

INDEXES

P·

255 n. 2 22:55 295 22:56 296 22:57 295,296 22:58 295 22:59 295,296 22:60 296 22:61 293 22:63-65 293 22:64 293, 305 22:66 293 22:66-71 293 22:67 293 22:69 290,294,307 22:70 294, 307 22:71 298,305 23:1 305 23: 1-25 299,305 23:2 305 23:3 305 23:5 286 23: 6-12 300 23:7 287 23:8 305 23:9 23:10 286,287,306,307 306 23:12 23:13 302,306 23:14 302,306,307 23:15 208,287,306 306 23:16 23:18 303,306 23:20 306 23:22 306 23:23 306 23:25 306 24n 23:27-31 7 23:34 7 23:35 24n 23:45 282 n. 1 24:13£ 3, 24n 24: 13-35 24:25 3, 280 348 24:25-27 24:26 6, 280 24:27 3, 6, 139, 280 24:28 139 24:29 273 n. 2 24:30 158, 273 n. 2 273 n. 2 24:33 24:35 273n. 2 3 24:35-53 24n 24:36-49

Luke

24:44 24:44-46 24:45 24:46 24:47 24:50-53

p. 3 6 3 3, 6 4 24n

John

1:19-27 1:20 1:21 1:23 1:38 1:49 2:13-16 2:19 2:21 3:2 3:26 4:31 6:1 6:4 6:23 6:30-35 6:31 6:59 6:69 7:40 8:44 9:2 10:34 11:8 12:1-8 12:4, 5 12:6 12:12-19 12:13 12: 14 12: 14-16 12: 15 12:16 12:34 12:38 12:39 12:40 12:41 13: 1-4 13:18 13:25-27 13:27 13:30

12 12 11, 12, 345 11, 12 26 26 221 288,289 288 26 26 26 156 156 26 155 156 357 185 153 45, 179 26 101n.1, 325 26 256 255 255 221 223 6 6 6 6 325 6 6 6 6 259 6,262 261 262 279

p. John 294 13:31 276 13:36, 37 276,295 13:38 221 14:13, 14 325 15:25 221 16:23 280 17:12 277 18:1 257,'279 18:2 279 18:3 228,280 18:4 281 18:8 280 18:9 281 18: 10 279,281 18:11 286 18: 12-13 295,296 18: 17 295 18: 18 294 18:19-23 357 18:20 294 18:23 287 18:24 295,296 18:25 295 18:26 296 18:27 288,298,306 18:28 307 18:29 306 18:28-40 307 18:31. 32 307 18:34 307 18:35 307 18:36 307 18:37 308 19:2,3 307 19:4 306 19 :4-16 307 19:5 302,307 19:6 307 19:7 307 19:9, 10, 12 7 19:23 7 19:24 6,204 19:28 259 19:31 8 19:32 8, 259 19:33 8 19:34 8 19:35 8, 259 19:36 8, 73, 270 19:37 6 19:40 6 19:41

377

INDEXES

John

20:1 21:25 Acts

p. 259 96

250 n.1 1:7 98 2 2:22 76,92 93 2:23, 24 93 2:25-35 93 2:29 93, 107 2:30 93,94 2:31 93 2:32 93,94,235 2:33 94 2:34 94 2:35 93 2:36 93 2:38 273n, 274n 2:42 243n 2:46 273n 2:47 150 3:6 5, 12, 153 3:22 301 4:27,28 226, 285n 5:34 299 6: 11-14 288 6:13 245 6:14 5, 12,153 7:37 299 7:57-59 162 10:11-15 162, 169 10:14 29 10:34 28 10:34-43 29 10:35 186 10:36-38 252 10:36-43 92 10:37-42 185 10:37-43 10:38 29, 44, 91, 92, 112, 138, 141, 159 186 10:39-40 92 10:40-42 29,349 10:40 92 10:41 29, 138, 252, 291 10:42

Acts

10:43 12:2 13:35 13:42 15 15:2 15:5 15: 13ff 15:21 18:3 19: 1-6 20:7 20:11 22:3 23:8 27:35 Rom.

1:8 1:16 5:20 6:3 6:3 6:4 6:11 11:2 14:20

p. 91, 186 218 94 357 169 323 162 169 357 25 106 273 n, 274n 273 n, 274n 226 291 273 n. 2, 274 n 243 171 269 201, 217 351 351 201 341 169

1 Cor. 90 1:24 169 8:8 351 10:1 10:14-22 274n 10:16, 21 274n 274n 11 :11-26 274n 11:20,22 266 11:23 266,267 11:24 266, 267 n. 1, 277 11:25 311 15:1£. 183 15:3 183, 184 n. 1, 349 15:4 28 15:20 2Cor.

4:4

57

Gal.

1:4 2:12f 3:19 Ephes.

1 :21 2:2 3:5 4:8 Phil.

2:26 3:21 Col.

p. 56 169 269 56 57 56 110 n. 1 277 190

1:6

243

1 Thess. 4:15 4:17

244 190

1 Tim. 2:5 6: 13 Titus

1:15 2:14 Heb.

1:2 6:5

James

5:14 5:17

2 Peter 2:13 3:4-13 Jude

v. 12 Rev.

1:9 11 :2 12:9

219n 301 169 219n 56 56 151 341 273 n. 2 250 273n. 2 218 n. 1 255 n. 2 48, 142

378

INDEXES

II. RABBINIC REFERENCES 1. MISHNAH

p.

Seder Zeraim 133, 165 Ber. 1: 1 ff. 36 Ber. 1 :4 264,333 Ber. 1 :5 75 Ber. 2:2 31, 74, 211 Ber. 3:2 132 Ber. 4:4 137 n. 1 Ber. 5:5 42 Ber. 8:1, 2 272 Ber. 8:2 272 Ber. 9: 5 151 Dem. 2:2, 3 339 Dem. 6:6 339 Maaser Sheni 5: 15 339 Orlah 3:9 337 Shah. 1 :4 119 n. 3 Shab.3:4 35 Shab.5:9 137 n. 1 Shah. 7:2 118 n. 2 Erub. 1-2 119 n. 1 Erub. 3-5 119 n. 2 Erub. 6-7 119 n. 1 Pes. 4:5 272 Pes. 5:3 157 n. 1 Pes. 5:4 257 Pes. 5:5, 6, 7,9 258 Pes. 6:1 259 Pes. 6:2 259 Pes. 6:6 261 Pes. 7:13 260 Pes. 10: 1 260,263,334 Pes. 10:1-7 262,334 Pes. 10:2, 3 263 Pes. 10:4263, 264,331, 332 Pes. 10:5 264,332 Pes. 10:6 264,265,333 Pes. 10:7 263,265 Pes. 10:9 265 Shek.2:5 343,345 Rosh ha-Shanah 3:7, 8 163 n. 2 4:5,6 321 Megillah 1 : 4-11 206 Megillah 3: 4, 5, 6 320 Megillah 4: 4 320 Hag. 1 :1 146 n. 3, 212 Hag. 2:1 124 n. 3, 354 Hag. 2:2 13 n. 2

p.

Hag. 2:7 235,337 Yeb. 3:4 337 Yeb. 12:6 37 Nedarim 165 Ned. 1 :4 167 n Ned.5:5, 6 167 n Ned. 9:1 167 n Sotah 3:4 337 Sotah 9:10 339 Sotah 9:15 37,41,337,343, 355 Git.9:10 209 n. 1 Kidd. 30: 1 320 Baba Qamma 1 : 1 13 Baba Qamma 9: 10 167 n Baba Metzia 1 : 8; 2:8; 3:4, 5 343,345 Baba Bathra 5: 1 13 n. 1 Sanh. 1 :3, 5 285 n Sanh.2:1 285 n Sanh.2:4 37 Sanh.3:2 166 n. 1 Sanh. 4: 1, 2 284 n. 1 Sanh.6:2 284 n. 1 Sanh. 9: 11 215 n. 1 Sanh. 11 :3 230,337 Eduy 1:2, 3 13 n. 2 Eduy 2: 10 137 n. 2 Eduy 5:6 162 n. 2 Eduy 8:7 343, 344 Abodah Zarah 144 n.2 Aboth 1: 1-16 285 n Aboth 1 :2 32 Aboth 1:10 285 n Aboth 2:1 230 Aboth 2:2 25 Aboth 2:5 214 n. 1 Aboth 3:14 30,38 Aboth 3: 15 38 Aboth 4:2 230 Aboth 5:6 46 Aboth 5: 18 134 Aboth 5:19 39 Aboth 5:20 108 Aboth 5:21 134 Aboth 6:6 139 Zeb. 5:8 265 Men. 11 :2 224

Men. 13:11 Bekhor 1 :7 Arakh 8:4 Kerithoth 1 : 7 Seder Tohoroth Kelim Kelim 13:7 Negaim 9:3 Negaim 11:7 Parah 1 :7 Parah 11 : 5, 6 Tohoroth 4: 7 Miqwaoth 5: 4 Nid. 1: 1 Nid. 4:2 Tebul Yom2:14 Tebul Yorn 4:6 Yadaim Yad. 3:2 Yad. 3:5 325, Yad. 4:6 Yad. 4:7 Yad. 4:8 Yad. 5:9

p.

238 120 n. 1 213 222 n. 1 165 165 337 14 n. 1 14 n. 1 287 337 337 351 13 n. 2 287 337 337 165 337 325 337,338 337,338 337 337

Tosefta

Ber. 2:2 31 Ber. 3:25 337 Shah. 1: 14 337 Shah. 14(15): 1 120 n. 1 Shah. 17: 2-3 52 Dem. 2:2 340 339 Dem. 2: 11 Dem. 2:12 339 340,341 Dem. 2:13 Hag. 2:9 13 n. 2 337 Hag. 3:35 119 n. 3 Yeb. 1:13 Sotah13:10 339 337 Sotah 15: 11 166 n. 1 Sanh.5:1 284 n. 1 Sanh. 7:5 284 n. 1 Sanh.9:3 Bekhor 5:3 46 Kelim Baba 337 Metzia 3: 15 163 n Yad. 2:2 105 n. 3, 337 Yad. 2:20

INDEXES

379

2. TALMUD Babylonian Talmud and Palestinian Ta/mud T.B. Ber. 3a

47, 143 n. 1, 24S n. 1, 343 T.B. Ber. Sa S2 T.B. Ber. 13 163 n. 1 T.B. Ber. 14b 46 T.B. Ber. 17a 74, 229 n T.B. Ber. 32b S9 n. 1, 237 T.B. Ber. 34b 114 n. 1, 229 n, 27S T.B Ber. 36b 119 n. 3 T.B. Ber. 47b 214 n. 1 T.B. Ber. S1a 143 T.B. Ber. S2b 272 T.B. Ber. S9a S9 n. 1 T.B. Ber. 60b 163 n T.B. Ber. 61a 49 T.B. Ber. 61b 291 n. 2 T.B. Ber. 62b 143 n. 1 P.T. Ber. 11b 34 P.T. Ber.VS 114 n. 1 P.T. Ber. IX 14b 33S P.T. Peah II 17a 3S4 P.T. Peah XIII 21a 33S T.B. Shah. 9b, 10a 297 T.B. Shah. 13a 337 T.B. Shah. 13b, 14a 119 n. 3 T.B. Shah. 1Sa 13 n. 2, 2SS n T.B. Shah. 30b 31, 132, 229 n, 230 T.B. Shah. 31a 172 n. 3 T.B. Shah. 32a 214 n. 1 T.B. Shah. 3Sa 2SS n. 2 T.B. Shah. 40a 120 n. 1 T.B. Shah. SSa S1 T.B. Shah. 62b 163 n, 16S n. 1 T.B. Shah. 67a 130 n. 4, 143 n. 1 T.B. Shah. 73b 118 n. 2 T.B. Shah. S6a 272 T.B. Shah. SSb 70 n. 1, 110 n. 1 T.B. Shah. 96b 11S n. 2 T.B. Shah. 101a 47 T.B. Shah. 101b 46 T.B. Shah. 104b 130 n. 4 T.B. Shah. 10Sb so T.B. Shah. 109a 47

B. T. and P. T. p. T.B. Shah 112b 11S T.B. Shah. 117b 274 T.B. Shah. 11Sa 137 n. 2 T.B. Shah. 119b70 n. 1,27S T.B. Shah. 123b 120 n. 1 T.B. Shah. 1S2b 42 n T.B. Shah. 1S3a 41 n. 2 T.B. Erub. 1Sb 46 T.B. Erub. 2Sb 22S T.B. Erub. 43b 129 n. 1 T.B. Erub. 100b 47, 129 T.B. Pes. 3b 143 n. 1 T.B. Pes. Sb S2 T.B. Pes. 21b 3S6 T.B. Pes. 49b 70 n.1 T.B. Pes. SOb 3S7 T.B. Pes. S3a 224, 22S T.B. Pes. S4a 233 n. 1 T.B. Pes. 70b 337 T.B. Pes. 101a 272,274 T.B. Pes. 109b 47, S2, 7S, 277 T.B. Pes. 110~ 111b 46 T.B. Pes. 112a 46, 47 T.B. Pes. 112b S1 T.B. Pes. 113a 232 n. 1 T.B. Pes. 11Sa 137 n. 2 T.B. Pes. 1S7b S2 T.B. Shek. S1 73 P.T. Shek. 49b 46 T.B. Yoma Sb, 10a 2S7 n.1 T.B. Yoma 19b 337 T.B. Yoma 20a 344 T.B. Yoma 21b 60 T.B. Yoma 29a 237 T.B. Y oma S7a 60 T.B. Yoma 69b SO n P.T. Yoma 44c 297 T.B. Sukk.S2a 4S, SO, 73, 74 T.B. Sukk. S2b SOn,51n.1 T .B. Sukk. Sa 192 n. 1 T.B. Betzah 11b 119 n. 3 T.B. Betzah 36 29S T .B. Rosh ha-Shanah 2Sa 46 31a SS T.B. Taanith 27b 60 n 231. n 2 P.T. Taanith IV 6Sb 291 n. 2

B. T. and P. T. p. T.B. Meg. 3a 47, 242 n. 1 T.B. Meg. 23b 357 T.B. Meg. 24a 3S7 T.B. Meg. 29a 192 n. 1 P.T. Meg. 71d 27 n. 1 T.B. Moed. Q. 10b 206 T.B. Moed. Q. 21a 357 T.B. Hag. 11b 124 n. 3 T.B. Hag. 13a 60, 109 n. 1 T.B. Hag. 13b 33, 291 T.B. Hag. 14a 109, 357 T.B. Hag. 14b 109, 109 n. 1 291 n. 3 33S P. T. Hag. 79d T.B. Yeb. 9a, 1Sb 119n.3 T.B. Y eb. 46a 106 n. 1 T.B. Yeb. SSa, b 154 340 T.B. Yeb. S6b 47 T.B. Yeb. 122a 3S7 T.B. Ket. Sb 213 T.B. Ket. SOa 46 T.B. Ket. 61b 229 n T.B. Ket. 111b 233 n. 1 T.B. Ned. 39a 163 n. 1 T.B. Nazir 23b 163 n, T.B. Sotah 4b 16S n. 1 337 T.B. Sotah 1Sa 236 T.B. Sotah 19a S2 T.B. Sotah 21a 237 T.B. Sotah 21 b 214 n. 1 T.B. Sotah 22a 33S T.B. Sotah 22b 357 T.B. Sotah 37b 355 T.B. Sotah 40a T.B. Sotah 47a SO n 13 n. 2 T.B. Sotah 47b T.B. Sotah 4Sa 339 T.B. Sotah 49a 14 n. 4 T.B. Sotah 49b 354 237 P.T. Sotah 19a P.T. Sotah 1 16b 209 n. 1 357 P.T. Sotah 116d 33S P.T. Sotah III 19a 33S P.T. Sotah V 20c P.T. Sotah IX 12 10S n. 1 214 n. 1 T.B. Git. 61a 46 T.B. Git. 6Sb 143 n. 1 T.B. Git. 70a T.B. Kid. 30b 49, S1 n. 1

380

INDEXES

B. T. and P. T.

p. T .B. Kid. 82a 269 n.1 T.B. Kid. 66a 338 T.B. Baba Qamma 59b 172n. 3 60b 355 113a 227 n. 1 T.B. Baba Metzia 9a 224 59b 42 n. 1, 130 n. 2 85b 130 n. 2, 344 114b 344 T.B. Baba Bathra 3b, 4a 240 n. 1 10b 238 15a 324 16a 50 58a 249 60b 338 73b 46, 129 74a 142n.1

B. T. and P. T.

92b 115b 116a T.B. Sanh. Sa T.B. Sanh. 7b T.B. Sanh. 12a T.B. Sanh. 35a T.B. Sanh. 38b T.B. Sanh. 43a T.B. Sanh. 46a T.B. Sanh. 65b T.B. Sanh. 67a T.B. Sanh. 88b T.B. Sanh. 90b T.B. Sanh. 97a T.B. Sanh. 97b T.B. Sanh. 98a T.B. Sanh. 98b 225, 233 n. T.B. Sanh. 107b

p. 17 n. 2 154 n. 2 213 66 357 291n.2 258 n. 2 132,355 298 308 n. 1 143 n. 1 298 13n.2 228 n. 2 55 n.1, 242 n. 1 242n.1 42n.1 137 n. 1, 1, 252 n. 3 50 n

B. T.andP. T.

p. P.T. Sanh. VII 2 284 n. 1 T.B. Mak.10b 51 T.B. Mak. 24a 63 T.B. Ab. Zar. 4a 70n.1 T.B. Ab. Zar. 9a 55 n. 1 T.B. Ab. Zar.12b 46 T.B. Ab. Zar. 24a 229 n T.B. Ab. Zar. 27b 147 n. 1 T.B. Ab. Zar. 37b 70 n. 1 T.B. Ab. Zar. 55b 47 T .B. Horayoth 13b 205 T.B. Menahoth 29b 336 T.B. Menahoth 75b 224 T.B. Hul. 105a 47 T.B. Hul. 105b 46 T.B. Hul. 106b 163 n T.B. Bekhor 30a 339,340 T.B. Arakh 16b 151 T.B. Temurah 16a 336 T.B. Nid. 24b 47, 129 T.B. Nid. 33b 338,339

3. MIDRASHIM, CODES p. 106 n 354 123 n. 4 50 n, 74 46 249 n. 2 249 55 225

Midrash Genesis Rabba

Midrash Song of Songs Rabba:

M.M.

ii v:2 viii: 1 ix:9 xx xx:12 xxvi:14 xlix xcix:8

ii:13

xxxiii 152b 123n.2,233n.1 xxxv 161 129 n. 1 xxxvi 162 123 n. 2, 233 n. 1

Midrash Exodus Rabba:

xv:1ff

100, 116, 221, 247

Midrash L111iticus Rabba:

ii:S ix:9 xxvi:S xxxvi:4

237 357 74 249

Midrash Numbers Rabba: v

xi:3 xv:2

46 52 229 n

Midrash Deuteronomy Rabba:

xi:10

46

221,243,n.3

Midrash Tehillin, i.e. Midrash Psalms: p.

Ps. 18:36 Ps. 91 :4 Ps. 107: 1 Ps.139:5 Ps. 146:8

234 52 173 123n.4 173

Midrash Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer: 343

xiii xiv xx

46 249 n. 3 106 n

Midrash Tanchuma:

Buber's Introd. 153 106 n Mezora ed. Buber 46 106 n Midrash Pesikta de Rab Kahana

ed. Buber: 40b

Midrash Pesikta Rabbati

ed.Friedmann:

47

P·

Seder O/am Rabba:

xvii

129 n. 1

Midrash Mekhi/ta

ed. Friedmann: Bes hall ah i 34b; vii, 40b Beshallah Wayassa iv, 5 iv, SOb v, Sia Mishpatim iv, 81a Mishpatim xviii 95 Ki-Thissa 103b

101 n. 1 137 n.2 228 n. 3 137 n.2 287 n. 1 172 n. 3 118

Midrash Sifra

ed. Weiss: 57b,99d 91a

338 172n. 3

Midrash Sifre

ed. Friedmann: Deut. 32

50 n

381

INDEXES

Deuteronomy 318, 136b 46 Shu/ban Arukh

Orah Hayyim 271 : 27

27 4

Maimonides : Mishneh Torah: Sep her ha-Madda': Hilkoth Talmud Torah -

Chs I: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12; IV: 3, 4, 5; v: 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 326-329

4. TARGUMIM p. Gen. 3:7 249 Ex. 12: 42 78, 92, 250, 278 Targum Jerushalmi

Targum Pseudo-Jonathan

Ex. 6:18 Ex. 40 : 10

p. 343 344

T argum Jonathan

p

Isa. 53 65, 67-72, 278, 345 Targum Sheni to Esther 55

III. REFERENCES TO DEAD SEA DISCIPLINE MANUAL AND ZADOKITE DOCUMENT D.S.D. col. I 1.14 55 D.S.D. cols. I and II 269 n. 1 D.S.D. cols. III and IV 44f D.S.D. col. IV 124

D.S.D. col. IV 10-16 170 D.S.D. col. VIII 1ff 289 n. 1 D.S.D. col. VIII 1-19 269 n. 1

D.S.D. col. IX 10 233 Zad. Doc. 1 : 4 269 n. 1 Zad. Doc. 9:21-27 269 n. 1 Zad. Doc. 9: 25 269 n. 1

IV. REFERENCES TO APOCRYPHA AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHA Jubilees 3:8-14 Jubilees 15:9 Jubilees 15: 33 Jubilees 16:20-31 Jubilees 23: 13 Jubilees 48: 15 Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus) Ben Sira 3: 21 Ben Sira 15:14 BenSira15:17 Ben Sira 44-50 Ben Sira 48: 1-12 Ben Sira 49: 8 Ben Sira 50 Tobit 3:8 Judith 12:7 I Mace. 2:58 II Mace. 2: 4ff II Mace. 3-4 IV Ezra 6:25 IV Ezra 7:27 IV Ezra 14

269 n. 1 269 n. 1 47, 129 269 n. 1 137 n. 2 52, 78 17 n. 2 291 49 n. 1 49 n. 1 323 342 109 n. 1 285 n 47 163 n 130 n. 3, 342 253 n. 1 240 n. 2 244 244 324

I Enoch I Enoch 8-9 I Enoch 10:17-19 I Enoch 23 I Enoch 39: 6a, 7a I Enoch 48:2-7 I Enoch 48:3 I Enoch 48: 4ff I Enoch 48:6 I Enoch 105 :2 Testament of Simeon 6: 6- 7 Testament of Levi 8: 14ff Testament of Levi 18: 5-12 Testament of Levi 18: 12-19: 3 Testament of Judah 25:3 Testament of Issachar 6 Testament of Zebulun 9 Testament of Zebulun 9: 8 Testament of Dan. 5 Testament of Naphtali 8 Testament of Benjamin 7 Testament of Joseph 20 Assumption of Moses 10:3ff

33 55 229 n 55 123 n. 2 123 n. 2 234n 229 n 234n 123 n. 3 47 233 108 n. 1 48 48 48 48 47 48 48 48 48 48

382

INDEXES

Ascencion of Isaiah 2: 4

47, 129

Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 29: 4 142 n. 1

Letter of Aristeas 305

163 n

Sibyllines 3: 592-593 Sibyllines 3: 620ff., 743

163 n 229 n

V. REFERENCES TO JOSEPHUS War, II. viii. 1 War, II. viii. 2 War, II. viii. 5 War, II. ix. 2-4 War, II. xiv. 8 War, II. viii. 2 War, V. iv. 2 War, V. v. 6 War, VI. v. 2, 3 Ant. II. xv. 1 Ant. IV. viii. 2, 3 Ant. XIII. i. 1, 6 Ant. XIII. x. 3

215 n. 1 105 n. 3 273 n. 2 300 285 n 285 n 287 n. 1 239 242 349 209 n. 1 215 n. 1 108 n. 1

Ant. XIV. ix. 3 Ant. XV. i. 1 Ant. XVII. iv. 2 Ant. XVIII. ii. 1 Ant. XVIII. ii. 2 Ant. XVIII. iii. 1, 2 Ant. XVIII. iv. 1 Ant. XVIII. iv. 3 Ant. XVIII. v. 2 Ant. XVIII. v. 3 Ant. XVIII. vi. 4 Ant. XX. iv. 4 Contra Apionem 1 : 8

354 285 n 237 255 n. 1 255 n. 1 300 300 255 n. 1 154 n. 1 255 n. 1 255 n. 1 300 324

VI. REFERENCES TO PHILO Ad Caium 38 ii 589 De Spec. Leg. iv 190

300 285 n

De Spec. Leg. (On Adultery) v 209 n. 1

VII. REFERENCES TO GREEK VERSIONS AND PESHITTA LXX LXX LXX LXX LXX LXX LXX

Isa. Isa. Isa. Isa. Isa. Isa. Isa.

53 53: 4 53: 6 53: 8 53: 9 53: 10-11 53: 12

Aquila Isa. 53: 4 Aquila Isa. 53: 10-11 Aquila Isa. 53: 12

65-67 65 66 66 67 66 67 65 66-67 67

53: 4 53: 6 53: 8 53: 10-11 53: 12

65 66 66 66-67 67

Theodotion Isa. 53:4 Theodotion Isa. 53: 10-11 Theodotion Isa. 53: 12

65 66-67 67

Symmachus Isa. Symmachus Isa. Symmachus Isa. Symmachus Isa. Symmachus Isa.

Novum Testamentum Graece - D. Eberhard Nestle's edition revised by D. Erwin Nestle & D. Kurt Aland and The New Testament in the Original Greek - Westcott's and Hort's edition have been used throughout. The Peshitto Syriac New Testament and the Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest: Evangelion da Mepharreshe have been extensively used. The following are specific references to the Peshitta in this work:

383

INDEXES

PESHITTA

Mark

1:14 1:15 5:34 7: 15 8:30 10:6 10:26 10:52 13:13 13:14 14: 10 14:18

Mark

278 n. 2 278 n. 2 220 168, 169 182 209 215 220 244 245 256 261,278

14: 19 14:33 Luke

22:22

John

19:28 19:30 Acts

10:43

278 n. 2 277 262 204 204 186 n. 1

SUBJECT INDEX Afikomen 265, 330, 331, 333 Age 291 Agape 158 aion 56, 57 Akedah 108, 315 Am ha-Aretz 25, 30, 32, 70, 72, 101, 115, 137, 137n.1, 168, 169,214and214n 275, 288, 336, 338 , Amoraim 27 n. 1, 34, 40, 339, 344 Angel(s) 47, 228, 281, 291 Angel of Darkness 44, 45, 46, 49 Angel of Light 49 Presence 291 Angel of His Truth 44 Apocalypists 243 Apocalypse (Little) 189, 239 n. 1, 240, 244, 243 n. 1, 244 n. 1 and n. 2 Apocalypse (Hebrew) 221 n. 1 Apocalyptic Literature 291 292 Apocrypha 17, 324 ' Aquaduct 300 Associates cf. 337-341 Atonement 218 n. 2, 219 n. 347 Authority 114, 221, 236, 251 n. 1, 282 n. 1 Baptism 28, 106, 108 n. 1, 125, 149, 152, 188, 192, 193, 217, 217 n. 2, 222, 233, 315 cf. 348, 351, 352 Baraitha 66, 73, 353, 354 Bath Qol 42 n. 1, 105, 106 n 107 192 193, 344 , , , Bediqath Hametz 254, 257 Ben 'Arbaim 157, 257, 271 Benedictions 274 Beth Din 285 n, 292, 344 Betrayal 256, 259 Between the Evenings 157, 258, cf. also Ben 'Arbaim Bitter Herbs 330, 331 Blasphemy 114, 290 Boethusean 286 n Bread 176, 262, 263, 264, 265 273 n. 2 274 n ' ' Bread of Heaven 100

Bread of the Presence 118 233 Breakin of Bread 100, 1S8, 273 n. 2, 274n Bridegroom 116 Calendar 48, 76, 100, 133, 180 Canon 4, 5, 17, 34, 47, 101 n. 1, cf. 318 Canon, Hieronymian 99 cf. also 318 Canon - Old Testament 322-326 Canon - Prophetic 322f Catechumens 90, 187 Chariot Vision 124, 291 see Ma'aseh Merkebah Church 4, 16, 19, 24, 31, 34, 62, 99, 114, 127, 138, 182, 210, 232 n. 2, 235 n. 1, 241, 243, 250, 273 n. 2, 276, 336 Codex Alexandrinus 199, 319 Codex Bezae 199, 267 Codex Ephraem 199 Codex Sinaiticus 324 Codex Vaticanus 24, 99, 174 n. 1, 199, 317 Codex Washington 282 n. 1 Codex Zacynthus 322 Commandment(s) 211, 213, 214, 215, 229, 230, 231, 232 n. 2, 236, 272, 336 Coronation Ritual 289 Cosmic Struggle 282 n. 1 Courtyard 287, 288 Covenant 33, 79, 88, 102, 249, 262, 266, 267, 267 n. 1, 268, 269, 270, 271, 271 n. 1, 277, 343f Covenant of Circumcision 344 Covenant with Abraham 269, 269 n. 1 Covenant - New 267 n. 2 268 Cross 314 ' Crucifixion 3, 8, 19, 22, 91, 102, 158, 254, 259, 270, 286 n. 1, 315, 316, 347 Cycles, opposing 116 Darshan(im) 4, 19, 354 Darush Derashah 139 327 Demons46,47, 127, 1Z8,200,202,222, 282 n. 1

SUBJECT INDEX

Demon possession 114, 127 Devil 29, 30, 112 Devils 112 Diaspora 101 Discipline Manual 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 55, 57, 125, 170 Divorce 209 Dositheans 41 Dragoman 27 Dragon 48, 78 Egypt 52, 53, 58, 63, 77, 107, 110, 121, 147,264,310,330,331,332,333,350 Elders 183, 184, 204, 222, 255, 279, 286, 293 End, Ends 55, 198, 242, 242 n. 1, 251 Epistle form 274 footnote Erub 119 and n. 1, n. 2, n. 3 Eschatology cf. 248 n Eschatological views 249, 250 Essenes 26, 105 n. 3, 273 n. 2 Eucharist 267 n. 2, 269 Eusebian Sections 319 Evil Spirit(s) 46, 47, 48, 200, 277 Exodus 78, 88v, 92, 107, 112, 156, 159, 191, 194,205,209,212,268,331,350 Exodus (New) 53, 100, 107, 116, 161, 177, 180, 212, 350 Exodus Haggadah of Passover 124 Exodus (Second) 213, 221 Form Criticism 24 Firstborn 186, 289, 314, 315 First man 123 Fountain of Light 44 Four Nights of Passover 52, 78,249,278 Ge'ullah 219 n, 333 Gemara 327, 357 Gentiles 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 177, 185, 228, 288, 315 Galilean(s) 296, 300, 308 Gospel 99, 136, 141, 183, 234, 243, 274 n Haberim 115, 235, 338, 339, 340, 341 Haburah 26, 115, 235, 273 n. 2, 275, 338, 340, 341 Haggadah 12, 14, 37, 41, 81, 89, 91, 102, 106, 124, 132, 199,202,205,227,269, 325, 350, 354, 355, 358. Haggadah of the New Exodus 107, 133, 157, cf. 158, 161 Haggadic Midrash(im) 4, 35, 37, 83, 94, 100, 158, 173, 176, 224, 228, 274 n, 280, 312, 347, 355, 357

385

Hagiographa 17 n. 2, 324, 325 Hakham 327, 328, 354 Halakhah 30, 32, 33, 33, 36, 41, 132, 165, 191, 214, 323, 335, 354 Halakhic 13 etc. etc. Halakhoth le Mosheh mi-Sinai 27, 28 Hallel Psalms 91, 258, 264, 333 Hardening of Heart 121 Hardness of Heart 136, cf. 180, 209 Haroseth 263, 333 Hearts hardened 149, 159 Hashaim 26 Hasidim 26, 72 Holy Communion 158, 317 Holy Spirit 60, 125, 185, 222, 233, 234, 235 Hermeneutics 284 n. 1, cf. 335 Homiletics cf. 354 Interpretation 63, 222, 284 n. 1 Israel 58, 60 n, 68, 69, 70 n. 1, 82, 83, 128, 137 n. 1, 144, 243, 289, 290, 353 (New Israel) Jubilees, Book of 335 Judge 293, 294 Kairos 110, 278 n. 2 Kashruth 168 Kerugma 17, 312 Kingdom 134, 182, 211, 215, 256 Kingdom (Messianic) 212, 214, 215 Kingdom of God 58, 74, 133, 134, 135, 137, 138, 141, 172, 178, 186,200,202, 203,205,207,212,215,216,232,251, 252, 260, 316, 353 Kingdom of Heaven 31, 211, 212 Kingdom of Satan 159 Korban 165, see also Qorban Kosher 169 Last Supper 7, 16, 91, 92, 99, 158, 217, 260, 267, 347 Law (Written) 3, 4, 15, 21, 31, 33, 38, 39, 40, 41, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55 n. 1, 68, 70, 72, 75, 77, 101, 110, 113, 118, 119, 120, 120n.1, 130, 132, 178, 194, 197, 203, 209, 211, 231, 269, 269 n. 1, 288, 292, 323, 325, 326, 327, 344, 345 Law (New) 99, 200 Law (Oral) 4, 13 n. 2, 25, 30, 31, 40, 52, 101, 113, 120, 130, 132, 158, 164, 166, 178, 191, 197, 209, 211, 214, 214 n. 1, 265, 326, 327, 344, 356, 357, 358

386

SUBJECT INDEX

Lawgiving 268 Leaven 257 Lectionary 318 Lectisternium 300 Leviathan 48, 142 Liturgy cf. 321, 22 Logion, Logia 23, 349 Ma'aseh 29, 116, 154, 219, 228, 229 Ma'aseh Bereshith 124 Ma'aseh Merkabah 33, 59, 109, 124, 291, Maccabean 54 Maggid 4, 355 Magic, Magician 80, 130, 147, 147 n. 1 Malef 45, 249 Manna 100, 157, 159, 176 Marduk 48 Marriage 154, 228 Masha! 135, 149, 169 Massora 29, 320 Matzah 260, 265 330, 332, 333 Megilloth Genuzoth 34 Mekhilta 335 Merkabah see Ma'aseh Merkabah Me Niddah 231 Messiah 53, 54, 58, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 92, 93, 105, 108, 109, 123, 123 n. 4, 129, 142, 153, 160, 183, 186, 188, 192, 193, 195, 197, 204, 219, 221, 224, 225, 227, 232, 233, 233 n. 1, 234, 235, 242, 249, 252 n. 3, 255 etc., 342, 344, 345 Messiah, King 108 Messiah, the spirit of the 106 n., 123 n. 4 Messiah, the preexistent 233 Messiah, heavenly pre-existence of the 123 n. 2 Messiah, the suffering of the 137 n. 2 Messiah, woes of 242 Messiah, the Days of the 137 n. 2 Messiah priestly 233 Messiah of Aaron 233 Messiah hen Joseph 73, 74 Messianic Age 72, 74, 205, 214, 221, 222, 229 n. Messianic time 173, 242 n. 1, 278 n. 2 Messianic Banquet 142, 275 Messianic Kingdom 68, 95 Meturgeman 4, 26, 135, 327, 328, 355 Midrash 20, 25, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 98, 110, 116, 125 n. 1, 137, 159, 163 n. 2, 169, 171, 172, 173, 190,221,224,225,

228, 243, 270, 274 footnote, 278, 283, 293, 308, 332, 334, 335, 343, 350 Midrash Rabba 4 and cf. Index for citations therefrom Midrashic 5, 7, 13 etc. Miqdash Qatan 60 Minim 14 n. 4 Miracles 42 n. 1, 52, 76, 77, 79, 113, 142, 145, 147, 153, 162, 178, 179, 182,220 Mishnah 4, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 133, 165, 167 n, 231, 248 n. 1, 334, 335, 356 Mishneh Torah 209 Nishmath 333 Nasi 60, 233, 286 n Normative Judaism 33, 34 Oaths of purgation and asseveration 296 'Olam 55, 56, 57, 75 'Olam hadash 228 n. 3 'Olam ha-Ba 228 n. 3 Omer 28, 117, 259, 347 Parables 41n.2, 42n., 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 138, 145, 149, 162, 182, 251, 355 Parashah 229 Parashoth 320 Pardes 139, 327 Parush 168, 338 Passion 347 Passion Week 99, 256 Passover 78, 92, 102, 124, 157, 171, 176, 205, 239, 249, 254, 254 n. 1, 255, 257, 258,259,260,262,263,264,265,271, 272,275,277,330,331,332,333,334 Passover Eve 52, 277 Passover Haggadah 124, 176, 223, 261, 269, 278, cf. 331, 332, 333 Passover Haggada (Jewish Christian) 102, 136, 212, 235, cf. also 157, 161, 176, 199, 314 Pericope(s) 98, 99 cf. 317ff Petuhoth 320, 321 Pesah Seder cf. Seder, Passover. Peshat 139, 171, 198, 244, 246, 327 Peshitta 19, 186 n. 1, 199, 200, 219 n., 278 Pesikta Rabbati 4, 123 n. 2 and cf. Index for passages cited. Pharaoh 79ff, 112, 349 Pharisaism 112, 160, 172 Pharisaic Judaism 236 Pharisees 54, 101, 114, 115, 117, 118,

SUBJECT INDEX

120, 121, 122, 126, 127, 131,136, 137, 142, 145, 159, 161, 162, 164, 168, 170, 172, 177, 179, 180, 181, 182, 189,209, 210, 212, 215 n. 1, 223, 226, 227, 228, 232,233,235,236,237,238,241,279, 292, 325, 336, 337, 338, 339 Phylacteries 28 n. 1, 35, 329 Piyyutim 25 Plague(s) 79-88, 176, 177, 213, 314 Prayer 114, 237, 250, 278 Prediction 152, 183, 184, 185, 256, 295, 349 Priest(s) 32, 36, 54, 60 (Zadokite) 101, 113, 117, 163 n. 1, 165, 222, 231, 235, 240, 241, 340 Priests, Chief 184, 185, 204, 226, 255, 256, 279, 284 etc. Priests High 252, 255, 255 n. 1, 271, 281, 285 n, 286 n, 288, 289, 290, 292, 293, 294 Priesthood 231, 343 Priestly circle 286 n Prince of Darkness 48, 125, 282 Prins of Demons 128 Prins of Light(s) 45, 125 Procurator 299 Prophecy, Prophecies (fulfilment of) 29, 294 Prophet (false) 292 Prophets, The 3, 4, 17 Pseudo-Jerome Canon Comes Hieronymi 24, cf. 99,317 Q 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 135, 136n, 160, 179, 180 Qabbalah 327 Qetz 55, 110 Qatzim 320f Qiddush 101, 158, 171, 171 n. 1, 182, 259, 260, 263, 266, 272, 273, 273 n. 1, 274, 274 n. 1, 275, 330 Qorban 165, 166 n. 1, 299 qurban 167 Qumran 28 n. 1, 32, 60, 137, 158, 205, 214, 275, 280 n. 1. 334 Qumranists 33 cf. also 269 n. 1 Rabbi3, 13, 19,21,25,26,31,32,46,63, 101, 105, 114, 120, 124, 335, cf. also 327-329 Rahab 48, 78 Red Heifer 32, 32 n, 231 Studia Post-Biblica vu1

387

Redemption 116, 121, 136, 159, 218 n. 2, 249,264 Rejection 293 Remez 139, 190, 198, 244, 327 Resurrection 3, 10, 28, 29, 40, 153, 228, 228 n. 2, 229, 309, 311, 311 n. 1, 353 Resurrection appearance 29, 311 n. 1 Righteous Remnant 69, 137 Roman Missal 317 Sabbath 18, 117, 118, 119, 119 n. 1, n. 2, 120, 120 n. 1, 130, 148, 248 n. 1, 286 n end. Sacred act 267 Sacred time 267 Sacrifices 222 n. 1, 231, 241, 315, 333 Sadducees 31, 54, 60, 181, 228, 228 n. 2, 235, 290, 291, 292, 325, 339 Sadducean rules as to purity & impurity 287 Samaritans 31, 41, 45, 52, 53, 119, 123, 153, 168, 179, 278, 320, 321, 323 Samaritan Nazirites 26 Sanhedrin 165, 191, 205, 223, 226, 245, 255, 284, 284 n. 1, 285 n, 287, 288, 290, 292, 293, 297, 298 Sanhedrin, Heavenly 344 Satan 12, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 98, 109, 125 n. 1, 126, 131,!137, 143, 177 n.1, 276, 281, 282, 282 n. 1, 352 Scribes 21, 113, 114, 115, 126, 131, 162, 170, 184, 198, 199,203,204,222, 230,231,232,235,236,239,256,284, 200, 286, 293, 314, 336, 337 Sea, crossing of the, 350-352 Seder, Passover 91, 259, 264, 271, 333 Seder Zeraim, i.e. first seder of the Mishnah 165 Sedition 290 Sepher Elijahu 221 n. 1, 346, 347 Servant of the Lord 72, 108, 183, 196, 290-291 Setumoth 320, 321 Shekinah 59, 60, 68, 69, 192, 229 n. 233, 239, 245, 253, 329 Shema 36, 37, 75 Sidra 98 Sign 178, 189, 193, 245, 251 Sin 49, 51 Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest 200 Sod 139, 327 Son of David 219, 290 Son of God 123, 289, 290, 292, 294 26

388

SUBJECT INDEX

Son of Man 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 92, 114, 118, 123, 184, 185, 188, 195, 196, 198, 203, 216, 217, 233 (Enochidic) 243, 247, 248 n. 1, 249, 250 Sons of Darkness 137, 170 Sons of Light 44, 46, 125 Sopherim 337 Spirit(ofGod) 107, 113, 125, 125 n. 1, 149, 152, 159, 162, 177 n. 1, 179, 233, 234, 235, 243, 316 Spirit of Light 45, 48 Spirit of Truth 45 Spirit of Perversity 45 Suffering Servant 60, 69, 183, 196, 304 Synagogue(s) 24, 25, 98, 101, 111, 112, 118, 122, 124, 145, 146, 148, 149,208, 214 Synagogue, The Great 337 Synod of Y abneh 17 n. 2 Synoptic Criticism & Critics 24 Synoptic Gospels or Synoptics 7, 112, 337 Taheb 12, 123, 153 Talmid 27 Talmid Hakham 25, 191, 340, 354, 356 Talmud 34, 40, 43, 115, 231, 342, 343, 356 Tanna 25, 36, 228 n. 3 Tannaim 13, 52 Tannin 48 Tannaitic 337 Tannaitic Literature 337 Tannaitic Period 52 Tannaitic Teachings 353 Tannaitic Tradition 286 n Targum(s) 4, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 246, 357 Tefillin 35, 52 Tehom 142 Temple 18, 33, 38, 53, 54, 60, 60 n, 69, 102, 122, 151, 161, 167n,214n.1,221, 226,228,229,231,233,239,240,241, 245, 251, 252, 252 n. 4, 254, 258, 271, 273 n. 2, 281, 288, 289, 290, 315, 325, 335,344 Temple, cleansing of, 221, 222, 226 Temple Court 320

Temple Veil 286 n Temptation 277 Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs 129, cf. Index Testimonies 9, 10, 11, 19, 20, 21, 196, 221, 225, 259, 262, 270, 280, 284 n, 288, 304 Tohoroth 146, 165 Torah 13, 40, 62, 70 n. 1, 101, 119, 134, 165, 208, 210, 227, 228, 228 n. 2, 231, 278, 314, 326, 327, 335, 337 Torah (Scroll of) 249 n. 2 Tiamat 48 Tradition 326 Transfiguration 188, 190, 193, 194, 198, 199, 205, 268, 277' 346 Trial 102, 254, 284, 292, 294, 298, 315, 347 Tribute 227, 305 Uncleanness: Grave 307 Midras 307 Wars of the Sons of Light and Darkness 125 Watching: Night of Watching 277 Word 6,29,35, 78, 138, 151, 163,222 Wilderness 316 Wine 330, 333 Writings, i.e. Hagiographa 323, 326 Yabneh 119 n. 3, 165, 341 Year of Release 315 Yetzer 49, 50 Yetzer ha-Ra 49, 49 n. 1, 50, 50 n. n, 1, 51 n, 1, 73, 74, 164 Yetzer ha-Tob 49, 164 Yadaim 165 Zadok 117 Zadokites 53, 54, 60, 240 Zadokite Document 59, 60, for passages cited see Index Zealots 215 n. 1, 227 Zeraim 165 Zizith 52, 159 Zoroastrianism 47, 128 Zugoth 285 n

INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES Aaron 109, 111, 124 Abayye 51 Abba Shaul 340, 341 Abel 45 Abiathar 5, 10, 118 Abihu 124 Abin Rab 50 Abiram 206 Abraham 10, 39, 59 n. 1, 60 n, 228 n. 2, 229, 231 n. 2, 249, 268, 269 n. 1, 277, 315, 332 Abraham ibn Ezra 62 Abrahams, I 35, 284 n. 1, 285 Abtalion (see also under Pollion) 285n, 354 Adam 33, 45, 249 and 249 n. 3 Adam Qadmon 249 Agrippa 255 n. 1 Ahaziah 127, 128, 130 Aher 291 Ahimelech 117 Ahriman 46, 47, 129 Akiba 33, 38, 47, 83, 109, 137 n. 2, 209 n. 1, 325, 335, 340, 344 Amaziah 58 Ambivius 300 Annas 255 and 255 n. 1, 286 Anselm 314 Antiochus Epiphanes 101, 245, 324 Antipas 154, 173, 203, 208 (see also Herod Antipas) Aquila 65, 66, 67 Archelaus 299 Ashmodai 47 Assi, Rab 231 n. 1 Baal Shamaim 245 Baalzebub 127, 128, 129, 131 Baba b. Bota 240 n. 1 Bacher, W. 27 n. 1 Bacon, B. W. 97, 244 n. 1 Barabbas 91, 300, 303, 304, 306 Beare, F. W. 223 n. 1, 226 n. 1, 239 n. 1, 243 n. 1, 244 n. 2, 257 n. 1, 309 n. 1 Beelzebub or (Beelzebul RSV) 106,

124, 127, 133, 135, 136, 138, 142, 143, 160, 177, 178, 193, 196, 197,200,202, 203, 222, 233, 235, 345 Bar Kokhbah 33, 291 n. 2, 292 Belial or Beliar (as in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs) 45, 47, 48, 129, 179 Ben Dama 147 n. 1 Ben Sira (or Ecclesiasticus) 17 n. 2, 56, 62, 291, - for passages cited cf. Index Ben Zoma 75 Bentzen, A. 248 n. 1 Berdyaev, N. 232 n. 2 Beth Hillel 13, 13 n. 2, 119, 119 n. 3, 210, 214, 339 Beth Shammai 13 and 13 n. 2, 119 n. 3, 209, 209 n. 1, 210, 214, 339 Blunt, A. W. F. 94, 96, 97, 121, 150, 150 n. 2, 162 n. 1, 173 n. 3, 17 4 n. 3, 183 n. 1, 185 n. 1, 257 n. 2 Bowman, J. 34 n. 1, 45 n. 1, 123 n. 5, 179 n. 1, 240 n. 2, 248 n. 1, 320 Broughton, J. 35 Buchler, A. 167 n, 285 n Budde 325 Burkill T. A. 195, 195 n. 3, 347 Burkitt, F. C. 291 and 291 n. 1 Caiaphas 255 and 255 n. 1, 286 Cain 45 Caligula 239 n. 1, 244, 244 n. 1 Carrington, P. 24, 99, 99 n. 1, 317, 318, 322 Charles, R. H. 108 n. 1 Clement 27 Colani 244 Coponius 300 Cornelius 29, 44, 91 Cowley, A. E. 171 n. 2 Cyrus 62 Danby, H. 74, 75, 167 n., 169 n. 1, 231 n. 2, 240 n. 3, 263 n., 284 n. 1, 285 n.

390

INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES

Daniel 245, 246, 251 Dathan 206 David 10, 73, 93, 94, 107, 118, 220, 233, 234, 235, 324 Davies, W. D. 317 Dodd C.H. 317 Dosa 74 Edersheim, A. 143, 150, 178 n. 1, 189 n. 3, 206 n. 2, 227 n. 1, 261 n. 2, 270 and n. 1, 290 and n. 1, 299 and n. 1 Ekron 127, 128 Eldad 206 Eleazar of Modi'in 228 n. 3 Eleazar 83 Eleazar b. Azariah 75 Eleazar b. Enoch 162 n. 2 Eliezer b. Hyrcanus 14 and 14 n. 1, 36, 42 n. 1, 106, 137 n. 2, 165, 167 n, 172 n. 3, 335, 343, 344 Elijah 11, 12, 15, 17, 42 n. 1, 109, 127, 128, 130, 148, 154, 173, 191, 192, and 192 n. 1, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 203, 204, 236 n. 1, 245 n. 1 Elijah, School of 242 n. 1, 330, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, Elisha 155 Eusebius 22, 244, 309 Ewald, G. H. A. 123 Ezekiel 4, 60, 109 Ezra 41, 343 Finkelstein, L. 337 Fraenkel, Z. 65 Gamaliel 36, 114 n. 1, 228 n. 2 Gaster, M. 319 Gaster, T. H. 44, 280 n. 1 Goudoever, J. van 28 n. 1, 100 n. 1, 350, 351, 352 Guilding, Aileen 99 n. 1 Grant, F. C. 111, 135 n. 4, 150 n. 1, 160 n. 1, 180 n. 2 Green, F. W. 298 n. 1 Hanina b. Antigonus 340 Hanina b. Dosa 42, 51, 60, 114 n. 1, 115 Harris, Rendel 301, 302 Hegesippus 90 Herford Travers 33 Herod 240 n. 1

Herod Antipas 24 n, 120, 121, 122, 154, 155, 180, 208, 287 Herodian circle 286 n Herodian(s) 121, 122, 208, 222, 227, 228 Herodias 208, 211 Higgins, A. J. B. 248 n. 1 Hillel 13 n. 2, 31, 118 and 118 n. 1, 209, 209 n. 1, 339 Hilleli te 341 cf. also Beth Hillel Hisda Rab 51 Hiyya 355 Hugo 320 Irenaeus 22, 218 n. 1 Isaac 10, 268, 315 Isaac Abarbanel 62 Isaac Nappaha 355 Isaiah 236, 247, 251 Ishmael b. Elisha 147 n. 1 Ishmael, The School of 50 Ishmael the son of Phabi 255 n. 1 Israel 137, 231n.2, 248 n. 1, 314, 315 cf. also Israel in Subject Index. Jacob 10, 60, 269 Jacob bar Aha 59 n. 1, 231 n. 2 James 3, 15, 16, 111, 147, 190, 217, 240, 277, 279 James, M. R. 302 Jastrow, M. 354 Jeremiah 240 JeromeSt. 207,317 Jezebel 154 Johanan 229 n. Johanan b. Zakkai 14, 32, 33, 41 n. 2, 47, 109 n. 1, 114 n. 1, 325 John (the Apostle) 3, 15, 16, 111, 147, 190,206,217,240,277,279,347,349 John (the Baptist) 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 105 and 105 n. 3, 106, 109, 152, 153, 154, 195, 196, 198, 210, 236 n. 1, 255, 342, 345, 346 John the Presbyter 22 John Hyranus 40, 101, 339 Jonathan (Rabbi) 50 Jonathan, high priest 255 n. 1 Jonathan (Maccabaeus) 270 Jose (Rabbi) 245 n. 1, 340 Jose ben Judah 172 n. 3 Joseph of Arimathea 308 Joseph the Galilean 82 Josephus 154 and 154 n. 1, 237, 239,

INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES

242, 255 n. 1, 273 n. 2, 285 n, 287 n. 1, 324, 338, 349 Joshua, high priest, 53 Joshua ben Hananiah 26, 42 n. 1, 106, 337, 344 Joshua b. Karha 74, 211 Joshua b. Levi 70 n. 1 Joshua ha-Sandlar 26 Judah b. Bathyra 14 n. 1 Judah ha-Nasi 4, 14 n. 4, 82, 312, 344, 356 Judas 212, 256, 257, 280, 279 Justin 22, 317, 321, 322 Justinian 25 Kahle, P. E. 25 n. 1, 65 Kennett, R. H. 270 Kenyon, F. G. 319 Klausner, J. 267 n. 1, 271, 286 n Knox W. L. 239 n. 1 Krauss, S. 106 n. 1 Lauterbach, J. Z. 146 n. 1, 335 Liebermann, S. 166 n. 1 Livy 300 Maimonides 25, 26, 33, 40, 105 n. 2, 135 n. 1, 139, 191, 205 n. 2, 211, 217 n. 1, 326-329 Major, H. D. A. 22, 27, 128, 128 n. 1, 134, 134 n. 1, 135, 135 n. 3, 141 n. 2, n. 3, 160, 161, 173 n. 1, 174 n. 2, 237 n. 2, 244 n. 1, 257 n. 2, 311 n. 2 Manson, T. W. 9, 12, 15, 22 Marcion 22 Marduk 48 Mary Magdalene 309 Mattathias (High Priest) 255 n. 1 Mattathias Maccabeus 345 Medad 206 Meir 41, 132, 166 n. 1, 249 n. 2, 340, 355 Metathron 291 Meyer, E. 275 n. 2 Micah 240 Mingana, A. 312 n. 1 Montefiore, C. 35 Moore, G. F. 338 Moses 3, 10, 12, 77, 87, 109, 110 n. 1, 113, 121, 123, 124, 156, 162,190,191, 192, 192,n. 1, 193, 194,203,206,249, 268, 326, 336

391

Nadab 124 Nahman 164 n, 277 Nahman b. Rab Hisda 49 Nahman b. Isaac 49, 163 n. 1 Nathan prophet 107 Nathan (Rabbi), early 2nd. century 42 n. 1 Nathan (Rabbi), 15th. century 320 Nehemiah (Rabbi) 258 n. 2 Onias III 54, 240 n. 2 Onias IV 54 Odgen 303, 352 Papias 22, 23, 28, 96 Paul 28, 112, 171, 183, 243, 244, 351 Peake, A. S. 270 n. 2 Peter 3, 15, 16, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 44, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 112, 116, 126, 141, 147, 162, 185, 186, 187, 188, 191, 192, 193,200,202,205,211, 212, 240, 243, 244, 248 n. 1, 252, 276, 277,281,282,288,292,293,295,296, 297,310,333,347,349 Peter, teaching of, 311 n. 1 Philo Judaeus 209 n. 1, 300 Pilate Pontius 24 n, 286, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308 Phinehas 343, 344 Pinhas b. Jair 38 Pollion 285 n, (see also under Abtalion) Quirinius

255 n. 1

Rab 51 Raba bar Abuha 344 Rahab 78 Rambam 354; see under Maimonides Rawlinson, A. E. J. 23 n. 1, 244 n. 3 Robinson, J. M. 108 n. 1, 113 n. 2, 125 n. 1, 127 n. 1, 141 n. 1, 177 n. 1 243 n. 2 Rome 291, but see under Index of Place Names Romans 351 Rufus 300 Sameas 285 n. 1, cf. Shemaiah Samuel (Amora) 274 Samuel bar Nahman 41 n. 1 Samuel (the seer) 257 n. 1 Sar ha-Mastema 129

392

INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES

Saul 257 n. 1 Schurer, E. 286 n Shammai 13 n. 2, 172 n. 3, 209, 210 Shammaites 13 n. 2, 118, cf. also Beth Shammai under Subject Index Shemaiah 285 n, 354 Shiloh 225 Simeon the High Priest 233 Simeon the Just 32, 285 n Simeon II - High Priest 285 n Simeon b. Gamaliel 222 and 222 n. 1 Simeon b. Lakish 50, 70 n. 1 Simeon b. Pasi 50 Simeon b. Shetah 138 Simeon b. Yohai 192 n. 1 Simeon (Peter) 111, 112 etc. Simon the Leper 255 Simon Maccabaeus 270 Simon the son of Camithus 255 n. 1 Solomon 53 Stephen 245, 288 Steinspring W. F. 267 n. 1 St. Francis 26, 62 Strack, H. L. - Billerbeck, P. 36 Swete, H.B. 319

Symmachus 65, 66, 67 Taylor Vincent 23 n. 1, 287 n. 2 Tertullian 22 Theodore of Mopsuestia 274 n Theodotion 65, 66, 67 Theophilus (High Priest) 255 n. 1 Tiamat 48 Tiberius 299, 301 Trypho 22 Turner, C.H. 195 Valerius Gratius 255 n. 1, 300 Vermes, G. 315 Vitellius 255 n. 1 Wellhausen, J. 185 n. 1, 341 Westoott & Hort 322, 323 Y onah (Rabbi) 73 Yusuf b. Salama 168 n. 4 Zadok (Rabbi) 167 n Zeus Ouranios 245 Zerubbabel 53, 233

INDEX OF PLACE NAMES Assyria 69 Babylon 6, 61, 213, 247 Babylonia 350 Bethany 224, 226, 255 Bethphage 224 Bethsaida (i.e. Bethsaida Julias) 159, 173, 182 Caesarea Philippi 16, 190 n. 1 Canaan 77 Capernaum 112, 113, 124, 145, 148, 149, 170, 174, 208 Dalmanutha 174, 178 Damascus 194 Decapolis 144, 173 Egypt for references see Egypt in Subject Index Ekron 127, 346 Emmaus 3, 4, 24 n Galilee 16, 37, 92, 112, 121, 122, 144, 152, 153,203,207,208,220,255, 272, 315 cf. 352 Galilee, Sea of, 173, 17 4 Gennesaret 159, 170 Hermon 190 Horeb 343 Idumea 122 Israel for references see Israel in Subject Index Italy 22

Jericho 219, 220, 225 Jerusalem 3, 12, 16, 29, 54, 60, 62, 95, 102, 117, 126, 127, 184, 216, 217, 219, 224, 244, 245, 256, 270, 314 Jordan 106, 125 Judea 246 Machaerus 155 Magdala 174 Mount of Olives 224, 240, 240 n. 3, 276 Nazareth 92, 96, 106, 245, 280 Nile 83 Nob 117 Palestine 111, 138 Patmos 218 Peraea 245 Pella 244, 245 Qumran 28 n, 32, 60, 137, 158, 334 Red Sea 88 Rome 98, 233 n. 1, 247 Shiloh 5, 117 Sidon 122, 170, 173 Sinai 42 n. 1, 124, 164, 190, 267, 269, 336 Tabor 124, 190 Tiberias 155, 174 Transjordan 122, 244 Tyre 122, 170, 173 Yabneh 17 n. 2, 165 Zarephath 155 Zion 6, 64, 78