m I LIBRARY OF THE University of California. RECEIVED BY EXCHANGE Class \ d Xlbe mniverstt^ ot Cbicaoo FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE ACCORDING TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE DIVINITV SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (DEPARTMENT OF NEW TESTAMENT LITERATURE AND INTERPRETATION) BY HENRY BURTON SHARMAN CHICAGO THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 1909 Zbc mntverslt^ ot CbicaQO FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE ACCORDING TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE DIVINITY SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (DEPARTMENT OF NEW TESTAMENT LITERATURE AND INTERPRETATION) BY HENRY BURTON SHARMAN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 1909 Copyright 1908 By The Uxiyeesitt of Chicago Published April 1909 Composed aud PriDtea By The University of Chicago Press Chicaco, Illinois, U. S. A. FIST IN MEMORIAM JOHN HOWARD SHARMAN 206817 A STATEMENT The results of study here set forth were presented first, in their main features, at a joint meeting of the New Testament and Systematic Theology Clubs of the University of Chicago on February 23, 1904. The fashioning of the material into a form suitable for the composi- tor's hands was completed first on September 24, 1904. In that copy there was no committal to any proposed solution of the Synoptic Problem other than the recognition of the Gospel of Mark as one of the main documents used in the production of the First and Tliird Gospels. On December 15, 1904, there appeared Some Principles 0} Literary Criticism and Their Application to the Synoptic Problem, by Ernest DeWitt Burton. After a prolonged and thorough study of this work, it was decided to accept its results, in their larger out- lines, as the critical basis for the present work. As a consequence, an almost entire rewriting of the material was made necessary, though the conclusions previously reached, both in general and in particular, were unaffected. This revision was concluded on June 13, 1905, and is herewith presented without any changes from the form given at that time. For various reasons, publication has been deferred until the present. The Uni\^rsity of Chicago February 23, 1909 A DEFINITION In definition of the scope of this study, it may be said that the word "Future," as used in the title, covers the time subsequent to the final severance of relations between Jesus and his disciples. There is excluded, therefore, the study of the reputed teaching of Jesus about his rejection, sufferings, death, resurrection, and appear- ances after the resurrection. There is included, however, a study of such teaching about the future as is reported to have been given in the post-resurrection period of Jesus' hfe. It has been the purpose and endeavor to bring under examination every utterance credited to Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels which con- tains teaching about the "Future" as above defined. That the study might comprehensively cover all phases of the outlook of Jesus upon the future, it has been the choice to err on the side of inclusion rather than of exclusion of passages with doubtful time content. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY §1. Sources and Documents §2. The Extent and Nature of the Documents §3. The Literary Principles of Luke and of Matthew §4. Document compared with Document . . . . §5. Results of Comparison of Document with Document §6. Gospel compared with Document . . . . §7. Results of Comparison of Gospel with Document PAGE I 96 CHAPTER n THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM § I. Absence of Political Background from the Gospels . . . 103 § 2. PoUtical References and the Poverty of their Content . . 104 § 3. Evidences of the Interest of Jesus in the National Life . . 106 § 4. Occasions and Forms of the Political Forecast made by Jesus 107 § 5. Absence from the Records of an Adequate Basis for Jesus' Fore- cast 109 § 6. An Exhibit of the Critical Events within the Lifetime of Jesus . 109 § 7. General Significance of these Events for Jesus . . . . 114 § 8. Special Significance of the Rise of the Zealot Movement . . 114 § 9. Attitude of Jesus toward the Zealot Movement . . . . 117 §10. Pharisaism and Sadduceeism in Relation to the Zealot Move- ment 117 §11. The Messianic Ideals of Jesus in Relation to those of Zealotism . 119 CHAPTER III THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS AND THE DAY OF THE SON OF MAN § I. The Time and Method of the Destruction of Jerusalem, and Their ImpHcations 123 § 2. Jesus' Twofold Concern for the Future 123 § 3. The Disciples in the National Upheaval — Their Prospective Longings Treated by Jesus 124 xii TABLE OF CONTENTS § 4. A Grave Peril to the Disciples in the Future— the Rise of Mes- sianic Claimants 126 § 5. Resultant State of the Disciples, and Consequent Demand for a Constructive Statement by Jesus 128 §6. A Positive Statement from Jesus as to the Future ... 129 § 7. The Single Theme and Its Relation to "the Day of Jehovah" . 131 § 8. The SimpUcity of Jesus' Thought about "the Day"— the Thought Examined 132 § 9. The Foremost Question Raised by the Sketch from Jesus . . 133 §10. Negative Aspects of Jesus' Portrayal of "the Day" ... 133 §11. Standpoint from which the Positive Aspects of Jesus' Thought Must Be Viewed— an Effort at Contrasts i34 CHAPTER IV THE FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 1. The Occasion, Time, and Report of the Discourse ... 137 2. Influences Affecting the Sayings of Jesus about the Future . 138 3. The Opening Forecast and the Resultant Question ... 139 4. The Persecution of the Disciples 140 5. The Destruction of Jerusalem 150 6. The Rise of Messianic Claimants i54 7. Events before the Siege of Jerusalem 165 8. The Day of the Son of Man 170 9. The Time of the Events i79 [o. Exhortation in the Final Discourse 185 ri. The Mission of the Disciples 202 12. Reconstruction of the Final Discourse 205 CHAPTER V THE DAY OF JUDGMENT §1. The Son of Man as Judge of Men 215 §2. False Prophets in the Day of Judgment 216 §3. Words as the Basis of Judgment 218 §4, Judicial Functions of the Twelve 221 §5. The Fate of Pharisees in the Judgment 225 §6. The Separation of Bad from Good in the Judgment . . 226 §7. The Basis of Separation in the Judgment 235 §8. The Fate of Certain Cities in the Judgment .... 246 TABLE OF CONTENTS xiii CHAPTER VI LIFE AFTER DEATH ^ I. The Resurrection 251 ^ 2. The Two Aeons 254 ^ 3. Hell or Gehenna (ye'evm) 256 ^ 4. Torment and Fire . 263 ^ 5. Hades (aSr/s) 265 § 6. Destruction 266 ^ 7. The Soul {4''"XV) ^-iid the Spirit (Trvev/xa) 267 ^ 8. Life and Eternal Life (C^rj) 270 ) 9. The Eternal Tabernacles 272 ^10. Paradise and Glory 272 ^11. Heaven 275 ^12. The Future in Vague Figures 288 ^13. The Narrow and the Shut Door 289 ^14. The Passing Away of Heaven and Earth 292 J 1 5. The Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man .... 294 CHAPTER VH THE KINGDOM OF GOD §1. Opening Announcements about the Kingdom .... 301 §2. The Kingdom as Actual in the Present 306 §3. Antitheses to the Kingdom" of God 309 §4. The Future in General of the Kingdom 311 §5. The Mystery of the Kingdom of God 315 §6. The Coming of the Kingdom of God 322 CHAPTER Vni THE CHURCH AND ITS INSTITUTIONS §1. The Foundation Rock of the Church 329 §2. The Stablisher of the Brethren 332 §3. Judicial Activities of the Church 334 §4. The Institution of the Supper 339 §5. Physical Immunity in the Mission 340 §6. The Extent of the Mission . . . ^ 342 EXCURSUS The Content of Document M 359 INDEX OF BIBLICAL REFERENCES CHAPTER I THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY §1. Sources and Documents §2. The Extent and Nature of the Documents §3. The Literary Principles of Luke and of Matthew §4. Document compared with Document §5. Results of Comparison of Document with Document §6. Gospel compared with Document §7. Results of Comparison of Gospel with Document CHAPTER I THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY §1. Sources and Documents The sources for the proposed study of the teaching of Jesus about the future are the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These sources seem to bear literary relations to one another. Many attempts have been made to solve the problem presented in these apparent relations. If these sources stand to one another in literary depend- ence of any degree, a study of their content cannot be made with entire disregard of the implications of such a dependence. Conclu- sions may not be drawn on the basis of three independent witnesses to the teaching of Jesus, if, as matter of fact, any one of them is depend- ent upon any other for certain portions of his material. Therefore, it is imperative, as preliminary to any study, that there be a definition of attitude toward the Synoptic Problem. It is believed that this problem has been solved, in its main features, by Professor Ernest DeWitt Burton in his monograph. Some Prin- ciples of Literary Criticism and Their Application to the Synoptic Problem.'' The results reached are stated in these terms: The conclusions to which our whole study has led may then be summarized as follows: 1. Our Mark, or a document in large part identical with it, was employed as a source of both our First and Third Gospels. 2. Matthew and Luke also possessed in common a document which contained substantially the material standing in Luke 3:7-15, 17, 18; 4:26-13 (14, 15), 16- 30; 5:1-11; 6:20-49; 7:1 — 8:3; herein referred to as the Galilean document ^y^ 3. Matthew and Luke also had a document in whole or in part identical with Luke9:5i — 18:14 and 19:1-28, which, however, they used in very different ways; herein referred to as the Perean document (P). 4. Matthew also had a document not employed by Luke, chiefly or wholly made up of discourse material. This is presumably the Logia of Matthew spoken of by Papias (M). 5. Additional minor sources there must also have been, the first and third evangelists having, in the main, different ones, as is illustrated in the case of the ' Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1904. 2 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE infancy narratives and the almost wholly independent additions to Mark's account in the passion and resurrection history. 6. Thus the sources of Matthew are the ^Slatthaean Logia, Mark, the Galilean document, and the Perean document, besides certain minor sources. In his emplo}Tnent of these sources the first evangelist gave the chief place to Mark and the Matthaean Logia, employing the Galilean document for illustrative purposes, and the Perean document for the enrichment of the discourses the basis of which was found in the Logia or in Mark. 7. Luke has the same chief sources as Matthew, with the exception of the Matthaean Logia. In his use of them he made ]Mark the basis, interpolated material from the Galilean document, omitting ]SIark's similar narratives when they seemed to him less full and vivid; added the Perean document in two solid sections, making the junction with INIark in such way that the arrival at Jericho indicated in this document should s}Tichronize with that recorded by Mark. Each of the tn-o later evangelists pursued a consistent and easily intelHgible method in the use of the sources, but each his own method. §2. The Extent and Nature of the Documents The documents restored by Professor Burton are set forth on separate sheets accompanying this work, except that of the Gospel of Mark only so much is shown as is needed for illustrative purposes, namely, Mark 1:1 — 6:44. Such departures, mostly minor, as are made there from the precise documentary limits set by Professor Burton will be dealt with in the course of subsequent discussions. In particular, it may be said here that certain sayings assigned to docu- ment M by Professor Burton, brief sayings of an isolated character, are not shown in document M, because they are regarded by the present writer as better placed in the minor sources pecuHar to ]Matthew.^ The general character of the Gospel of j\Iark is well known. An examination of the portion shown in the accompanying exhibit will reveal that within that portion the chronological indications are scanty; and that the movements of Jesus, apart from general statements as to tours, are not more precisely defined geographically than by the simple assertion of his presence upon, or on either side of, the Sea of GaHlee. The single mention of a place away from the sea is in the vague term, "his own country," Used as a source, this portion of Mark imposed no restrictions upon an editor of a gospel because of its chronological or geographical precision. ' For a discussion of these omitted sayings as a body, see pp. 361-72. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 3 It will be agreed that document G shows "a marked uniformity in general literary character; that the narratives are all vividly told, sur- passing in this respect even the vivid narratives of Mark; and that in literary style it reaches the high- water mark of the gospel material." Like Mark in the Galilean period, its chronological data are few and simple; and, as to place, it might appropriately be called the Caper- naum document, knowing Nazareth, but no other city by name except Nain. As a source, it also offered freedom for editorial rearrangement, if such were at any point the wish of its user in gospel construction. Within the document M there are neither chronological nor geo- graphical data, except the assertion that the Sermon was spoken on the Mount. The material is discourse, the narrative element forming no part of this collection. Therefore, an editor might distribute it as he wished, having regard only for the fact that two large bodies of the material stood as formal and well-articulated addresses. But though the several vivid parables which form the second group, M §§15-25, all had a similar theme, the kingdom of heaven, they permitted, by their literary character as separate units, distribution to such various points within narrative material as might be deemed appropriate by an editor. While the document P is a most notable combination of narrative and discourse, it shows a surprisingly small number of clear references to time and place, especially when its length is considered. From first to last it knows the name of only a single town through which Jesus passed, Jericho, P §63. It does not locate the home of Mary and Martha more definitely than as in "a certain village," P §11. "A certain place," "a certain village," are its repeated phraseology, P§§i2, 58. Similar is its use of "a certain lawyer, or man, or woman," P §§2, 10, 16J, 23. Events are placed "as they went in the way," P §§2, 11; and discourses long or short are introduced by the formula, "And he said unto his disciples," P §§24, 47, 54, 60. Now and then the address is directed to the mukitudes, P §§33, 44. This paucity of geographical indication Luke seems to have endeavored to relieve by inserting at certain intervals some broad suggestions of a general progress southward toward Jerusalem. Thus in P §1 the opening assertion that "he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem" seems to be an introduction to the whole document, framed by Luke 4 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE himself. The same thought appears again in P §§3, 38, 57, 64C. In P §57 the addition of "through the midst of Samaria and Gahlee" seems to have been suggested as appropriate at this point by the defi- nite reference in P §58 to one of the lepers as a Samaritan. It may be reasonable to assume that document P as used by Matthew was devoid of even these very vague hints of progress southward, and that the incident in P §63 was the only one related definitely to a place by name. As for time hints, they are infrequent, and not strong enough to control editorial adjustment of document to document. Another of the marked characteristics of the P document is the very evident looseness of connection between certain of its parts, especially of sayings to sayings. This may be seen by an endeavor to find relationship in thought between P§§i7, 21, 22, 34, 37, 45, 50, 52, 56 and the sections which precede or follow each of these. To this general informality of structure there is to be added the presence of indications that, at some points, junction has been effected on the basis of a misunderstanding of content. Such seems to be the case, for example, in the relation established between P §§19, 20, where the thought in the first verse of P §20 has been taken as if opposed to "hypocrisy," a supposition seen to be without support when the thought of P §20 as a whole is grasped. In view of the general character of document P, as exhibited in these striking particulars, it would seem that it is open to editorial choice, in using it as a source, either to use it as a whole or to distrib- ute its material at various points within another document which has clearer hints of geographical and chronological movement. Espe- cially is this true of the sayings of Jesus contained in this document. From this cursory examination of the nature of the several docu- ments from which Matthew and Luke wrought their gospels, it may be concluded that, even working as editors with the utmost of reasonable reverence for their sources, our first and third evangelists were free, so far as concerned the inner necessities of the documents, either to use the documents as a whole or to redistribute them in whole or in part. §3. The Literary Principles of Luke and of Matthew There may be stated summarily at this point the leading principles actually employed by these authors as determined by a study of the THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 5 works they have produced, it being left to subsequent examination of the appHcation of these principles to justify the inference that they were the controUing factors in the editorial task. The literary principles of Luke seem to have been : Principle i. — To disturb the form and the order of his several documents only in such degree as was necessary in order to effect a satisfactory individual junction, or the union of them into a consistent whole. Principle 2. — ^To omit in the use of document MK such narratives or sayings as seemed to be duplicates of narratives or sayings in his other documents, favoring especially the fuller and more vivid narra- tives of document G. Principle j. — ^To supply minor statements of movement from event to event, or of progress within a general period. The application by Luke of these principles to his documents may now be followed step by step: Documents MK and G both regarded the gospel history- as begin- ning with the public activity of John the Baptist. Whether in Luke 3:1-6 (G §iA) we have preserved for us exactly the original form of the opening paragraph of document G may not be affirmed with certainty. That document G had some such introductory paragraph is clear' from the content of those verses which Matthew and Luke use first in common from G, G §iB.^ Having introduced thus the ministry of John, Luke used document G §iB-F. Of this material, G§iD stood also in document MK §iH.3 But MK §iH was not without its influence, for apparently from it there was drawn by Luke (and Matthew) the phrase, "the Holy Ghost," the document MK 1 The necessity for certain brief arguments about the hmits of the documents arises from the differences of opinion between the present writer and Professor Burton as to the precise content of the documents. Perhaps for simpHcity of statement, Pro- fessor Burton seems to have preferred, for the most part, not to credit two documents with similar material, except when the external evidence compelled it. Conflict of opinion affects only a few, minor passages. 2 That some G §iA has influenced both Matthew and Luke seems indicated by their phrase, "the region round about Jordan," which is not derivable from document MK. 3 That it stood in both documents is evidenced by the similar order of its parts in Luke 3: 16 = Matt. 3:11, an order called for by the presence of G §iC with its question, toward the end, directed to John. 6 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE parallel to the " fire" of document G/ Since Luke uses here G §iF, the account of the same fact which appears later in MK §32C-E is omitted (Principle 2), only MK §32 AB being used at that point, Luke 9:7-9.^ It may not be affirmed with assurance that Luke found his 3:21, 22 as §2 of document G rather than as §2 of docu- ment MK, but, in view of the presence of document G §4B-E in both Matthew and Luke, some such preceding section as G §2 must be credited to document G.^ Luke's respect for the order of his documents, especially for his document G, is nowhere more strikingly shown than in his retention of G §3 at the point where that document seems to have given it to him. It would have been entirely natural for him to have transferred document G §3 to some point in the infancy section, rather than leave it here, where it interrupts the most natural movement from G§2 to G §4. Following this use of document G §3, Luke used G §4, being uninfluenced by document MK §3B, which, however, Matthew used as Matt. 4: lib J Passing from the temptation of Jesus, Luke used successively from document G its next three sections, G §§5-7. Hav- ing used here the document G account of the visit of Jesus to Nazareth, he omits later the account in document MK §29 (Principle 2). For document G §5 the document MK equivalent is MK §4. Document MK now presents in §5 an account of the Call of the Four, but the call, as there described, is abrupt and without preparatory condi- tions. Apparently for that reason, Luke prefers to use the more circumstantial and natural narrative supphed to him by document G §8. But that section of document G presupposes the presence of a great multitude of followers. Document MK §9 supplies the condi- tions for the gathering of such a multitude. Document G §7 is followed, therefore, 5 in Luke by document MK§§6-9, after which 1 See pp. 20, 21. 2 That Luke 3:19, 20 is not the product of the condensation and transference of document MK §32C-E seems assured from the fact that if it be such it is the single instance of such procedure in the whole work, of Luke. 3 Perhaps support for this conclusion is found in the use of "the heavens were opened" by Matthew and Luke as against "rent asunder" by Mark. 4 That Luke 4:1, 2a, or its equivalent, stood as G §4A seems necessitated by G §4B-E, though the thoughts of G §4A may be found as MK §3A. s It is not assumed that the editorial motives of the evangelists may be determined with certainty. But there is not excluded the endeavor to assign a reasonable and sufficient motive. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 7 document G §8 is inserted, to be followed in turn by eight successive sections of document MK, MK §§10-17. The location of the document G account of the Sermon on the Mount, G §§10-17, within the framework of document MK seems to have been determined by Luke's identification of the situation por- trayed in G §9 with that outlined in MK §16. It results in Luke's changing of the order of his document MK §§i6, 17, and in the rewrit- ing of MK §16 in such form as to eliminate the local element and to conform it to the general situation portrayed in G §9. Having pre- ceded it, however, by MK §17, he must needs represent Jesus as hav- ing come down from the mountain, for the multitude of G §9 and MK §16 cannot be addressed except "on a level place." Having provided a setting for the Sermon under the influence and by the use of G §9 and MK §§i6, 17, Luke follows with G §§10-17, his only record of the Sermon. And since document MK subsequent to MK §17 has nothing which demands a different course, he acts on his principle of keeping his documents intact by following the record of the Sermon by the remainder of document G in its order and without interruption, G §§18-22. Luke is free now to move within the limits of documents MK and P. In document MK his next section, MK §18, deals with the charge against Jesus of league with Beelzebub. But document P contains an account which seems to be a duphcate, P §16. Therefore MK §18 is omitted by Luke (Principle 2). That part of MK§i8 which is not paralleled in P §16, namely MK §i8E, has its parallel in P §21. Document MK §18 A has provided a multitude, and MK §19 requires the presence of a multitude. In order to provide this feature of the setting, a feature lost to Luke by his non-use of MK §18, Luke reserves his use of MK §19 until he has inserted MK §§20, 21, the introduction to MK §20 supplying the multitude. The influence of the change of order is seen in another particular, the thought content of MK §21 resulting in the change of "whosoever shall do the will of God" to "these who hear the word of God and do it," Luke 8:21 compared with document MK§i9.' I In view of the sequence of events in MK §§i8, 19, it is worth considering whether we have in P §i6J the document P record of that which stands in MK §19, even as in P §i6A-I there is the parallel to MK §i8B-F, and whether Luke 8:21, as against the close of MK §19, was influenced by the belief of a parallelism in P §i6J. 8 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Why Luke does not take up the parable in MK §23 is explained (Principle 2) by its presence in P §37. That he should omit the par- able in MK §22 may be accounted for, perhaps, by the general Hkeness of the situation it portrays to that in the parable of the Sower, MK §2oA, in both cases the casting of seed upon the earth. That MK §24 falls out results apparently from the use of MK §19 after, instead of before, the parables by the sea. These several adjustments of the document MK narrative at this point all seem to have resulted from the parallehsm of document P to document MK which begins with MK §i8B. Luke now employs consecutively document MK § §25-33, except §§29, 32C-E. The faithfulness of Luke, in the main, to his sources mil be recognized if it is recalled now that to document MK §T,s he has departed from the order of his document MK, not- withstanding the necessity of adjusting it to the documents G and P, only in the different placing of the Call of the Four, in the reversal of order in MK §§i6, 17, and in the setting of MK §19 after instead of before MK §§20, 21. His choice of document G §§iF, 6, as against document MK §§32C-E, 29, results in these events finding a place earlier in the record of Jesus' hfe than if he had followed document MK. Other than these instances, there are no differences in order between Luke and his document MK which affect a full section, the remaining divergences consisting of the arrangement of paragraphs within the sections on the Last Supper and on the Trial.' The problem of the location of the contents of document P was apparently a most difficult one for Luke, because of the almost entire absence of chronological and geographical indications in that docu- ment. It made mention of one place only, and this Luke utihzed as a guide for the placing of document P within the document MK. frame- work. In P §63 Jericho was named. In MK 10:46 also it was found. It was decided, it seems, to synchronize these arrivals at Jericho. But MK 10:46 set the event ''as they went out from Jericho," while that of P §63 was recorded as happening as "he entered and was passing through Jericho." To adjust the docu- ments (Principle 3), the "as he went out from Jericho" of MK 10:46 was made to read in Luke 18:35 "as he drew nigh unto Jericho." 1 For a study of the relations of Luke to document MK beyond MK §33, the reader is referred to Professor Burton's monograph. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 9 The document P was regarded by Luke, in the absence of more pre- cise indications, as covering the activity of Jesus beyond Jordan. Its beginning was made therefore to parallel MK 10:1. Hence Luke's documentary material for the Perean period was the tenth chapter of document MK and the whole of document P. Having found one point of contact between them in the common mention of the town of Jericho, he interpolated his document MK chapter as a whole before document P §63. In accordance with Principle 2, document MK 10:2-12 was omitted because of document P§52, likewise MK 10:31 because of P §41; certain of the thoughts of MK 10:35-45 are to be found in P§3i, and in Luke 22:25, 26. That document P might not stand destitute of chronological and geo- graphical hints, document MK 10:1 was apparently rewritten as the opening of P§i, and there was added also P§§38, 57, 64C (Prin- ciple 3). The literary principles of Matthew were neither so few nor so simple as were those of Luke. They may be stated as follows : Principle i. — ^Within those narrative portions of his documents where chronological or geographical data were absent or were vague, to group those events that were related through having a common geographical center. Principle 2. — ^To combine the several accounts of his documents when they seemed to record the same event or discourse, especially when the material presented any considerable body of the words of Jesus. Principle 3. — ^To group the sayings of Jesus on a single theme, even to the extent of taking one phase of the theme from one docu- ment and another from another. Principle 4. — ^To choose document ]\IK as against document G where they possessed material in common — the opposite of the Lukan preference. Principle 5. — To condense the narratives of MK where they were especially full of secondary details. Principle 6. — To change the order of thoughts within a section of one document when necessary to the effecting of a junction with matter from another document. Principle 7. — To make the Pharisees the source or the object of lO THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE such unfavorable criticism as the documents leave indefinite in source or object. Principle 8. — To enlarge quotations already made from the Old Testament, and to insert additional ones at other points in the histor}\ Principle g. — ^To modify the apparent rigor of hard sayings. Principle lo. — To ehminate all demoniac confessions of Jesus as the Christ.^ Principle ii. — To eliminate references to anger or other apparently condenmable moods in Jesus. Matthew could not well begin his use of document MK by the insertion of MK §iA, for his previous recording of the infancy nar- ratives indicates that he had another conception of the beginning of the gospel than that set forth by documents MK and G. But passing over MK § i A he uses MK § iB-G, except C, in the order E, B, D, G, F (Principle 6), the portion F preparing for the message of John taken from G §iB, D, E. The absence of MK §iC from both Luke and Matthew, together with the fact that the quotation is said in MK §iB to come from Isaiah, whereas portion C is from Malachi, makes it reasonably clear that C came into Mark, subsequent to the use of document MK by Luke and Matthew, through the influence of the quotation taken by them from G§2oC. In the difference between the beginning of G §iB and Matt. 3:7 there is seen the appHcation of Principle 7. As against G§iF, Matthew chooses the form and place of MK §320 (Principle 4). MK §2 with perhaps some influ- ence from G§2 is next used.^ In the combination of MK §3 and G §4 Matthew makes use of MK §3B which had been passed over by Luke. Since Matthew had opened his gospel with an impressive genealogy of Jesus drawn from another source he does not make use of G §3. An apphcation of his Principle 8 may be seen by compar- ing G §4B with Matt. 4:4. Of document G, §§5 and 6 are omitted because of preference for the MK record (Principle 4). Therefore Matthew now uses MK §4, placing between portions A and B his document G §7, to which he attaches a lengthy quotation (Principle 8). There now lay before him the choice between MK §5 and G §8, and ' Perhaps Matthew acted in this particular under the influence of such a thought as that in I Cor. 12:3, "No man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit." ' On the source of Matt. 3: 14, 15, see pp. 361-72. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY ii he chose the former (Principle 4). But there followed in document MK a section which Matthew could not use as a whole, MK §6, because of the nature of most of the narrative (Principle 10). Turn- ing to document G he found the record of a tour in Gahlee and of a widespread fame of Jesus, G §9. The situation there portrayed' he apparently identified with MK§§6E, 9, loB, and used the record of it given him by G §9. This resuked in the Sermon on the Mount, G §§10-17, being given its place by Matthew at this point in his gospel. The same section, document G §9, has been determinative, it seems, for the location of the Sermon by Luke, but he has identified the situa- tion in G §9 with that portrayed in MK §16 rather than that in MK §§6E, 9, loB, and therefore has placed the Sermon after using MK §§6-17. Having derived a position for the Sermon from document G in comparison with document MK, Matthew is prepared to bring into use both the account of the Sermon given in document G and that supphed by the discourse document which he alone possessed, the important document M, Moreover, since he has now reached a lengthy body of discourse material, there is occasion for the free and full apphcation of Principle 3. For its apphcation, document P sup- phes a large number of utterances of Jesus which, by the greater or lesser looseness of their attachment to the contexts in P, invite to redistribution. The actual course of Matthew in the use of his several documents at this first point where he has the basis for a lengthy discourse from Jesus seems to have been as follows: The document M form of the Beatitudes was chosen, M §1, as against G § loA. But the actual experiences of the early Christian community seemed so clearly portrayed in G § loB that this Beatitude was added from G, it not being recognized that the last of the document M Beatitudes was the M parallel for document G§ioB. From M I It is not necessary to assume that document G §9, as we now have it, is in the pre- cise form that came to the hands of Matthew. By a comparison of MK §30 with its parallel in Matt. 9:35, it will be found that Matthew adds "and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness. " Simi- larly, it will be found that to the first statements of MK §31 A he adds in Matt. 10:1, "and to heal all manner of disease and all manner of sickness." Within G §9 the words "and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness among the people" may be the editorial addition of Mat- thew, being his form of summary for the activity of Jesus on his tours. 12 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE there was drawn then M §§2-4. The last of these dealt at the close with quarrels between brethren. Finding in P §34 a detached por- tion which had the same general theme, it was brought into the Sermon (Principle 3), forming the first evident interruption to the structure handed down by document M. Document M §5 on adul- tery was used next, and document P was searched for what it could contribute to that theme (Principle 3). It was found to have a single detached paragraph, P §52. For this there was provided an introduction in the manner of the formula which document M re- ported, though shortened to the simple, "It was said also." In con- nection with his use of P §52 here, there may be seen a striking illus- tration of the application of Principle 9, in the form of the addition, "saving for the cause of fornication." When later he comes to the use of a similar saying appearing in MK 10:11, he adds the same modification of its apparent rigor, Matt. 19:9. It is, further, to be asked whether the "maketh her an adulteress" is a softening of "committeth adultery." Document M §6 follows this addition to M§5. InM§§7, 8 there was the document M parallel to G §12; document M§§7, 8 shows two themes in an orderly, progressive treatment, document G §12 is a confusion of these two themes. The editorial question was whether document G had anything to contrib- ute to the record. G§i2A=M§8A, G§i2B = M§7B, G§i2E = M§8C, G §i2G = M §8A, G §i2l = M §8B, G §i2j = M §8D, G §i2D is reserved by Matthew for use as an appropriate close to the specific injunctions of the Sermon, Matt. 7:12. It will now be seen that of G §12 there remained without parallel in the document M account of the Sermon the portions C, F, H. These have the single theme. Lend- ing. Matthew decides to take up the portion C, but to it he appHes his Principle 9, so that the words "of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again" become, under his hands, "from him that would borrow of thee, turn not thou away." This modification of the ap- parent rigor of the document G saying excludes the possibility of Matthew's use of the portions F, H of G § 12, for they assume the form of the first saying to be that in G §i2C. If Matthew had left his G §i2C in the form in which it reached him, it would have served better than it now does as the sequel of M §76 and illustration of the principle of conduct enunciated in M §7 A. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 13 M§§9-ii are used next. But sayings of Jesus on prayer were reported in documents P and MK also, briefly in the latter. Thus in P §13 there was a form of prayer recorded. But M §11 had not dealt with the content of prayer, its concern being with the manner. Attachment of P§i3 to M§ii could be satisfactorily effected only by the supplying of an appropriate introduction to the thought. This is done by Matthew in the words of Matt. 6: 7, 8, the latter verse derivable from the closing verses of P § 24. The contribution of docu- ment MK to the subject lay in MK 11 : 25, which Matthew makes to follow P §13 in the Sermon, and therefore omits when he comes to use MK 11:20-25 in his parallel, Matt. 21:20-22. To this verse from document MK as used in Matt. 6:14 he adds the normal inference from the verse, that is, Matt. 6:15. Thus enlarged from documents P and MK, the second member, M §11, of the trilogy M §§10-12 is followed by the third, M §12. Matthew has reached now those sections which form the natural conclusion of the document M record of the Sermon, M §§13, 14. Not intending to use document P as a whole, and being, therefore, under the necessity of distributing within the area of his other docu- ments such of document P as he wished to retain, Matthew determines, it would seem, to find a place for considerable of document P in the Sermon on the Mount. Therefore there follow now in succession P §§26, 17B, 48, 24.^ From document G its §§13, 14 are now drav.n, except that G §i4AB, not being germane to the subject, are used by Matthew elsewhere, as will be seen subsequently. Apparently under the desire to include in the Sermon all detachable sayings of Jesus on prayer, Matthew now inserts P §15.^ Being now at the end of such specific injunctions as precede the concluding paragraphs of the Sermon in both documents G and M, Matthew uses, as a summary, the verse which he had omitted in his use of G §12, namely, G §i2D, adding to it the same thought as he added to MK 12 : 31 in his writing of Matt. 2 2 : 34-40 as the parallel to MK 1 2 : 28-31 . This is followed in turn by M §§13, 14, the latter section being the document M 1 On the difference in form between the opening of P §26 and Matt. 6: 19, and on the non-use of P §25 while the sections on each side of it are used, see pp. 61-63. On the source of Matt. 6:34, see pp. 361-72. Of P §17 the portion A had already appeared as a part of M §26, and the portion C was perhaps regarded as obscure in meaning. 2 For a discussion of the source of Matt. 7:6, see pp. 361-72. 14 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE parallel to G §§15, 16. The Sermon proper was concluded by the use of G §17. There is now a return to that section in document MK from which there had been digression for the inclusion of the Sermon, namely, MK §6. By Principle 10 that section as a whole is excluded. But the use of such parts as do not involve the demoniac confession is permitted; therefore MK §6C is taken up as Matt. 7:28, 29, and applied to the Sermon. The "great multitudes" of Matt. 8:1 are those provided by document G §9, with which Matthew^ had pre- ceded the Sermon; and since G §9 apparently had been identified by Matthew with MK §§6E, 9, loB, he now gives a place to MK §ioA. Matthew had left behind him MK §7 and might now take it up; but portion A of that section implies the synagogue incident, and portion B locates it in Capernaum. However, the next unused section of document G will supply the movement to Capernaum, G §18, and is the document G sequel to the Sermon. It is used next therefore by Matthew, there being inserted between portions B and C a saying of Jesus which Matthew takes to be related, by its theme, to the close of B, namely, P §40. The Matthaean elimination of the "elders of the Jews" as the bearers of the centurion's request may have been made in the conviction that they could hardly be regarded as so favor- able to the activity of Jesus (compare Principle 7). This incident of G §18 having brought Jesus to Capernaum, MK §7 could now be used by Matthew, portion A being passed over. But MK §7C recorded the demoniacal acknowledgment of Jesus, therefore it could not be used (Principle 10); in its place there was substituted a quota- tion from Isaiah, "Himself took our infirmities, and bare our dis- eases" (Principle 8). Since MK §8 is introductory to the Gahlean tour recorded in MK §9, and since that tour already has been identified with G §9 and taken up, MK §8 falls out of the Matthaean record. The next unused document MK account is that in MK §11, but this implies an absence from Capernaum for a time, and Matthew now has Jesus in Capernaum. Not until MK §25 is there a clear indication of the movement of Jesus away from Caper- naum. That section is chosen therefore as the next in the Matthaean narrative, the "great multitudes" of Matt. 8: 18 being derivable from "And all the city was gathered together at the door" of MK §7B THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 15 which Matthew had just used, but with the omission of this sentence; and hkewise appearing at the opening of MK §253, "and leaving the multitude." But it was the concern of Matthew to include also, so far as practicable, the narrative portions of document P. P §1 being in large part the Lukan introduction to the whole document, there was first available to Matthew P §2; this is given a place between portions A and B of MK §25. Naturally MK §§26, 27 are made to follow. But the former narrative, MK §26, was of such a nature (Principle 10) that it demanded adaptation. It must be so rewritten that the men themselves and not the demons within them address Jesus as " Son of God." MK §26B makes it clear that the confession proceeded from the demon as a result of his being commanded to leave the man; MK §26B is therefore dropped by Matthew, for with- out it the confession is represented as from the man himself. In the Matthaean rewriting of MK §26 A there is a striking instance of the application of Principle 5; and the same again in the complete dropping out of MK §26D. Because MK §26B was not usable on account of its content (Principle 10), its explanation of the plurahty of demons did not appear. But MK §26C with its plurals was used; therefore Matthew must needs begin his narrative with the assertion that there were two demoniacs, though his source had recorded one only. It may be surmised that the brevity which omits portions D and F of this section is traceable, in part, to the unwillingness to adapt these portions to the plural number. In short, the differences between MK§26 and Matt. 8:28-34 are all naturally explainable as the resultants of the apphcation of Principle 10. Having brought Jesus to Capernaum by the use of MK §27, Matthew is able to use the group of Capernaum incidents which imply an absence from that city for a season, MK §§11-13. The general introduction to the whole supplied by MK §27 supplants the two special introductions in MK§iiA, MK §i2A.' After having gathered up these sections of Capernaum incidents there is a return to the other group which is located in that city after the return from "the country of the Gerasenes," namely, MK §28 (Principle i). In the use of this section there is seen again the apphcation of Principle 5, by which MK §28A and E are combined into a single statement, I For a discussion of the source of Matt, gii^a, see pp. 361-72. l6 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Matt. 9:18, 19; and portions B and D are abbreviated as Matt. 9: 20-22. A motive for the omission of portion C may be found in the limits it sets to the power and knowledge of Jesus. ' Document P now suggested, in P §§3, 4, a mission of the disciples. Within document MK also the appointment of a body of men for such a mission was the next highly important event as yet unused, MK §17. But document MK contained at another point a record of the actual sending-out of these men, MK §31; and the latter had many elements in common with the document P §§3, 4 narratives which had sug- gested the inclusion of a mission record at this point in Matthew. Acting apparently on Principle 2, Matthew decided to combine the accounts in MK §§17, 31 with that in P §4. A careful examination of j\Iatt. 9:37 — 10: i6a will reveal the fact that these verses are com- posed of P §4 + MK §§17, 31, every thought in those sections being taken up by Matthew, and no thought appearing which may not be found in those sections, except the definition of the limits of the mission in Matt. 10:5, 6.^ The opening words of P §4 imply a situation where many needy and responsive ones are present; this is supplied by Matthew by preceding his use of MK §31 with the use of MK §30 and MK §330, the latter being omitted when he comes to use AIK §33 as Matt. 14:13-21. To MK §30 there is added the Matthaean formula, "and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness;" and to MK §31 A the same in the words, "and to heal all manner of disease and all manner of sickness." Because of the presence of such a large number of sayings of Jesus in these sections which Matthew had combined under the influence of Principle 2, he has approached Principle 3. That Principle he now applies to such sayings of Jesus about the activity of the disciples as passed beyond a specific mission during his own lifetime. If there be made a careful search through Matthew's several documents for all the material which deals with a future mission of the disciples and the sacrifices for it and persecutions attendant upon it, the list will be found to be as follows : Document MK 13:9-13; 9:37,41; 8:34-38; document P §§22, 20, 32, 44B, 6; document G §i4B. An examina- ' On the source of Matt. 9:27-34, see the monograph of Professor Burton. 2 For a discussion of the source of Matt. 10:5, 6, see pp. 88-92. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 17 tion of Matt. 10: 17-42 will reveal that it contains all of this material; the order is as follows: Document MK 13:9-13 = ? §22 +docu- ment G §146+ document P§2o=MK 8:38+document P§32 + P§44B' = MK 8:34, 35+ document MK 9:37 = ? §6 + document MK 9:41. It will be observed that in Matt. 10: 23 there is a defini- tion of the hmits of the mission which corresponds in conception to that in Matt. 10:5,6.^ That Matthew did actually draw from the docu- ments after the manner here set forth can be tested in the case of documents G and MK; in the former, by observing how he omitted G §146 in his use of that section in the construction of the Sermon on the Mount, because not germane to the subject, but uses it here; in the case of document MK, by studying the omissions and reconstruc- tions of Matthew when writing parallels to his document MK at MK 13: 9-13 = Matt. 24:9-13; MK 9: 37-42 = Matt. 18:5,6. Apparently because Matthew had so enlarged the scope of the instructions to the disciples about their mission, the fact of an actual mission at that time in the history, MK §316, is lost sight of by the evangelist, and in its place there stands a statement of activity on the part of Jesus himself. Matt. 11: 1. By this statement, however, a fitting introduction is made to that which is now supplied by document G § 20. In the use of G §20, the portion B is dropped as being imphed in Matt. 11 : i, and D as being narrative interrupting the course of the thought of Jesus. In the place of portion D there is supplied from P §50 the sole reference of document P to John the Baptist, supplemented by the interpretation of John suggested by document MK 9:13. Document P has been used to the end of §4; P §6 also has been taken up. Since Matthew has not used his material so as to record an actual tour of the disciples, P §7 is not usable in his narrative. The next two sections of unused but usable material in document P are therefore P §§5, 8; these are made by Matthew to follow imme- diately after G §20, a suitable introduction being supplied by Matt. 11:20.3 A review of Matthew's use of document MK to the present will show that there has been taken up from it all but the following sections : 1 In his use of P §446, there is an illustration of Matthew's Principle 9. 2 On the source of Matt. 10:166, 23, 2$b, 41, see pp. 88-92 and 361-72. 3 On the source of Matt. 11:28-30, see pp. 361-72. l8 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE MK §§14-16, 18-24, 29, 32, ^7,. These sections Matthew now places consecutively in his narrative in the precise order in which they stand in document MK; and, what is quite as striking, he does not depart again from the order of MK to the end of that document, except in making the cursing and the withering of the fig tree to hap- pen on the same morning, Matt. 21:18-22 as against MK 11:12-14; 20-25. That is to say, Matthew under the influence of documents G and P, but especially the narrative document G, removes from liis document MK and rearranges certain sections; but when he has passed beyond the Hmits of the influence of document G, he sets down what remains of document MK in the precise order of that document, thus bringing into direct sequence those parts separated by the gaps caused by his excerpts, for example, MK §§24, 29. But in his further use of document MK, Alatthew shows constantly the influ- ence of his remaining documents, P and M. Thus in the midst of MK§i5 there may be detected the influence of the narrative in P §43A.' His unwilhngness to attribute anger to Jesus (Principle 11) accounts for his omission of words to that effect which appear in MK §15. When he undertakes to use MK §16 he is faced again by the assertion of demoniacal confession of Jesus, MK §i6C, and in accordance with his fixed Principle 10 he ehminates that part of the record, putting in the place of it a lengthy quotation from the Old Testament (Principle 8) which attributes a quite different motive for the charge that Jesus be not made known. The next unused section was MK §18, and to this ]\IK narrative Matthew held a parallel in P §16. He therefore applied Principle 2, and formed a union of documents MK and P in the foUowing order: P§i6A-t- MK §i8B = P §i6B + P §i6D = MK §i8C -f P §i6F + MK §i8D = P §i6G-l-P §i6H-fMK§i8E + P §2i^ + P §i6C-l-P §i6K3 -f-P §i6N + P§i6M + P§i6I. Because MK §16 had supphed the multitude required by MK § 18A, the latter falls out of Matthew's nar- rative. The choice of MK §i8D as against P §i6G is explainable by the obscurity of the latter. The bringing-in of the only other saying > On the source of Matt. 12:5-7, see pp. 361-72. 2 On the source of Matt. 12:33-37, see pp. 218-21. 3 Matt. 12:40 seems to be the Matthaean substitute for P §i6L, wTitten in tlic light of history. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 19 upon this subject from P §21 is very instructive as to the method of Matthew (Principle 3). Two applications of Principle 7 may be seen by comparing P§i6BC with Matt. 12:24, 38. The editorial addi- tions in Matt. 12:23a, 456 are suggestive of some Matthaean tendencies. If Matthew omitted P § 16J because he intended to follow immediately with MK §19, that tends to confirm the suggestion pre- viously made that P§i6J is the document P account of the same incident as is related by document MK in MK §19. The discourse which now follows in document MK, MK §§20-24, is supplemented by parables drawn from documents P and M, the order being appar- ently as follows: MK §2oA-fMK §2iC + MK §2oB + 0.T. quotation (Principle 8)+P §9-f-MK §2oE+M §i5A-f-MK §23 = P §37A + P §37B +MK §24A-f-O.T. quotation (Principle 8) +MK §246, adapted so as to prepare for M §i5B-fM §§16-19.' The omission of the parable in MK§22 may have been due, as was suggested in the case of the same Lukan omission, to its similarity to that of the Sower, supplemented in Matthew's case by the likeness of the parable taken from M §15. Document MK §§25-28, 30, 31 having been already used, Mat- thew next takes MK§29, and follows it immediately by MK§32. In his use of the latter. Principle 5 is applied, to the shortening of the narrative. When Matthew passed from MK §32 to MK §33 it was not possible for him to use MK §33 A, because he had not recorded the actual tour of the disciples which MK §33 A impHes, namely, that in MK §3iB. But he uses the rest of MK ^t,^, omitting only portion C which he had employed as a fit setting for the commission- ing of the disciples, Matt. 9:36. Enough of the Gospel of Matthew has been considered for an adequate exhibit of his principles and method in the use of his documents. His method having been set forth, such of his material as is concerned with the teaching of Jesus about the future will be examined subsequently in connection with the special theme of which each part of it treats. It would seem that the conclusion of Professor Burton to the effect that "each of the two later evangelists pursued a ' The discourse is discussed as a whole on pp. 315-22, at which point the reasons for the Matthaean procedure are considered, and the few minor verbal departures from documents are reviewed. 20 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE consistent and easily intelligible method in the use of the sources, but each his own method" is supported by an examination of the facts. §4, Document compared with Document It is highly instructive and will yield important results for use in a constructive exhibit of the teaching of Jesus about the future to make a careful study of such material as is common to two or more of the documents from which our gospels have come. Though not all of the common material bears upon the theme of the present work, it is profitable to review it all, its narrow hmits making a complete study possible without undue digression. To know what differences in form or in substance are to be observed in reports of sayings of Jesus which have come down to us through different lines of tradition is of the very first order of importance. /. Document G compared with Other Documents A. DOCUMENT G COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT MK I. The Message of John the Baptist Document G§i Document MK§i Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance : and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And even now is the axe laid unto the root of the trees; every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the tire. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he There cometh after me he that i."! mightier than I, that Cometh after me is mightier than I, whose the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize down and unloose. I baptized you with water; you with [[the Holy Ghost and ■with'^ fire: whose but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, fan is in his hand, and he will throughly cleanse his threshing-floor; and he will gather his wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will bum up with un- quenchable fire. Have we here two different and fundamentally opposed concep- tions of the prospective work of the Christ ? That document G did not contain "the Holy Ghost and," but that this phrase was taken by Matthew and Luke from document MK, seems probable. It is the only element which document MK could contribute to the enrich- ment of document G, and is wholly foreign to the fundamental thought of G §1. Document G §1 deals throughout with a baptism of fire. Shall it be said that G reports the real forecast of John while MK sets forth that outcome which history actually gave ? Which conception is more in accord with the expectations current in the days of Jesus ? THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 21 Which conception does subsequent history show to have been that of John the Baptist ? If that of document MK, why did John doubt whether Jesus was the Christ when Jesus was actually fulfilling the programme of MK § i ? But this doubt of John is recorded by docu- ment G only, G § 20. Has it failed to find a place in MK because it would be inconsistent with the expectation of John recorded in MK § I ? Does document G in its whole representation of the message and attitude toward Jesus of John take us nearer to the facts of the history ? 2. The Method and Message of Jesus Document G §§s, 6 Document MK §4 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit Nowafter that John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee: and a fame went out concerning him into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and say- through all the region round about. And he ing, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all. is at hand: repent ye, and believe in the gospel. And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and he entered, as his custom was, into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Isaiah. And he opened the book, and found the place where it was written. The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. Because he anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor: He hath sent me to proclaim release to the cap- tives, And recovering of sight to the blind. To set at liberty them that are bruised. To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book , and gave it back to the at- tendant, and sat down: and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them. To-day hath this scripture been fulfilled in your ears. And all bare him witness, and wondered at the words of grace which proceeded out of his mouth. By which method and with which message did Jesus begin his public activity in Galilee ? Is not the message in document G the assertion of a sense of prophetic vocation, while that in document MK is the announcement of an impending crisis ? Does the subse- quent detailed record of document MK support the behef that Jesus began his ministry with such an announcement as is credited in MK §4 ? What was the attitude of Jesus toward any approach to a premature messianic interpretation of himself ? Or is MK to be re- garded not as a report of words actually spoken by Jesus but as a summary of the evangeHcal conception of the content of his early messages ? And if the latter, is it in accord with the development of events as these are reported subsequently, even in document MK? Which of the two courses is more in keeping with the general spirit and method of Jesus? Which form of statement more properly 22 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Document MK §5 And passing along by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon casting a net in the sea: for they were fishers. And Jesus said unto them. Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men. And straightway they left the nets, and followed him. And going on a little further, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the boat mending the nets. And straightway he called them : and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired servants, and went after him. defines the mission of Jesus as conceived by himself ? Is this last question best answered by a record which document G again is the only document to preserve, G § 20C ?^ 3. Method in the Call of the Four Document G §8 Now it came to pass, while the multitude pressed upon him and heard the word of God, that he was standing by the lake of Gennesaret; and he saw two boats standing by the lake: but the fishermen had gone out of them, and were washing their nets. And he entered into one of the boats, which was Simon's and asked him to put out a little from the land. And he sat down and taught the multitudes out of the boat. And when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon, Put out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught. And Simon answered and said. Master, we toiled all night, and took nothing: but at thy word I will let down the nets. And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes; and their nets were breaking; and they beckoned unto their partners in the other boat, that they should come and help them. And they came, and filled both the boats, so that they began to sink. But Simon Peter, when he saw it, fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depail from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord. For he was amazed, and all that were with him, at the draught of the fishes which they had taken; and so were also James and John, sons of Zebedee, which were partners with Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men. And when they had brought their boats to land, they left all, and followed him. Which account of the Call is the more intelligible and normal ? Which seems to be derived from the period nearest to the occurrences ? Without reference to circumstantiality of detail, which reads more like precise history? If document G, what bearing does that have on the relative valuation of G at other points where it has narrative in common with MK ? A Sa-^ng of Jesus 4- Document G §13 A And judge not, and ye shall not be judged: and condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: release, and ye shall be released: give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, shall they give into your bosom. C For with what measure mete it shall be measured to you again. Document MK §2 B If any man hath ears to hear, let him hear. And he said unto them. Take heed what ye hear: C with what measure ye mete it shall be measured unto you : and more shall be given unto you. D For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath. Which document preserves the true context of the similar saying in portion C about "what measure ye mete" ? Or is it to be regarded I For a discussion of these questions, see pp. 301-6. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 23 as a repeated saying ? If the latter, what does it mean in the MK context ? Is the MK context more normally continuous and intelli- gible if portion C be omitted ? Why does Luke omit this saying from the MK paragraph though using the rest of MK §21 as Luke 8: 18 ? Is it because he had already used it from document G as Luke 6:38 ? Then why not omit the rest of the MK paragraph, since it is mostly in document P ? Is the absence of portion C from Luke at this point, Luke8:i6-i8==MK4:2i-25, to be accounted for rather by supposing that it was absent from the MK used by Luke, but subsequently was brought into document MK either from one of the gospels which had taken it from G, Luke 6 : 38 = Matt. 7 : 2, or from some unknown source ? B. DOCUMENT G COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT M I. The Beatitudes of Jestjs Document G§io Document M§i A Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom A Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the of God. kingdom of heaven. B Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shaU B Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be laugh. comforted. C Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. '^fiii ^}^^^^^ '^''^ y^ '^^' hunger now: for ye shaU be D Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after f^iied. righteousness: for they shall be filled. E Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called sons of God. F Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and F Blessed are they that have been persecuted for when they shall separate you from their company, righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of and reproach you, and cast out your name as evU, heaven, for the Son of man's sake. Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy: for behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the same manner did their fathers unto the prophets. Which form of the Beatitudes is the more authentic ? Does the apparent greater originality of document G as compared with docu- ment MK, seen in preceding comparisons, hold for document G as compared with document M ? Does M § 2 help toward an answer, that is, does it suggest that the sayings ran: Blessed are ye poor; Blessed are ye hungry; Blessed are ye mourners; Blessed are ye persecuted ones; Ye are the salt of the earth; Ye are the hght of the world ? Is it easier to suppose that the G form of report developed into that in M, or the reverse ? How account for the exceptional length of the G Beatitude about persecution as compared both with the M report of the same and with the other Beatitudes ?' I For a discussion of some of these questions, see p. 51, paragraph 7. 24 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Two Contrasts from Jesus Document G§i2 Document M §§7, 8 Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, Resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whoso- ever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him twain. Ye have heard that it was said. Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy: but I say unto you. Love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you; that ye may be sons of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust. For if ye love them that love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the Gentiles the same ? Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefuUy use you. To him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and from him that taketh away thy cloke withhold not thy coat also. Give to every one that asketh thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them like- wise. And if ye love them that love you, what thank have ye? for even sinners love those that love them. And if ye do good to them that do good to you, what thank have ye? for even sinners do the same. And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? even sinners lend to sinners, to receive again as much. But love your enemies, and do them good, and lend, never despairing; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be sons of the Most High: for he is kind toward the unthankful and evil. Be ye merci- ful, even as your Father is merciful. As to orderliness in the thought, which account is preferable? As to scope of report, which is more complete ? What shall be said as to the nature of those thoughts which G alone has preserved? Shall it be said that M has omitted the most rigorous of the appar- ently hard sayings of Jesus on the subject of resistance to forceful evil? 3. The Good Tree and the Corrupt Tree DoctTMENT G §§is, 16 Document M §14 A Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, butjiinwardly are ravening wolves. By their fruits ye shall know them. B Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles ? C Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but the corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. D A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. E Every tree that bring- eth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. F Therefore by their fruits ye shall know them. G Compare portion C. B For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. C Compare portion G. D For there is no good tree that bringeth forth corrupt fruit; nor again a corrupt tree that bringeth forth good fruit. F For each tree is known by its own fruit. G The good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth that which is evil : for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. H And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say ? H Not every one that saith unto me. Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. I Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy "by thy name, and by thy name cast out devils, and by thy name do many mighty works ? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 25 Which is the more authentic report of the words actually spoken by Jesus on this occasion ? What shall be said of the document M material which has no parallel in document G, namely, the portions A, E, I ? Does that material form another unit, complete in itself, dealing with another theme, the subject of " false prophets " ? And is that subject treated in the terms of John the Baptist, portion E com- pared with G §iB end ? Do the two parts of the M account form a single consistent whole, the unity of which would not be called in question were it not for the document G account ? Which record forms the more natural and normal conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount? If Jesus thus referred to "false prophets" whom did he mean? Of those sayings which are common to both documents which form seems the more authentic ?^ C, DOCUMENT G COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT P Document G has nothing in common with Document P. d. document g compared with unknown sources The Genealogy of Jesus DOC0MENT G §3 And Jesus himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty years of age, being the son [(as was sup- posed)]] of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zenibbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the sort of Elmadam, the son of Er, the son of Jesus, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Symeon, the son of Judas, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon, the son of Amminadab, the son of Ami, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, the son of Methu- selah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. Since this genealogy of Jesus is not in the Gospel of Matthew, it may not be affirmed with certainty that it was a part of document G.' But if not in G why did Luke place it between certain portions of G instead of at some point in the narrative of the birth, infancy, and youth of Jesus ? Its introductory words fit it for the place that it holds between certain sections of G. If those words were in some source other than G, must not that source have passed already beyond the narration of the period of private life ? If so, does not that fact deter- I For a discussion of these and other questions raised by the passage, see pp. 216-18. ' See p. 5, n. i. 26 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE mine that this genealogy is from another source than that which gave Luke his infancy narratives since that source contributes nothing sub- sequent to the youth of Jesus ? If those introductory words were not in the source which supphed the genealogy, why should Luke fashion them in order to place the genealogy out of its most normal setting ? Is it more reasonable or less to assume rather that the genealogy with its introduction about the beginning of Jesus' work stood in docu- ment G, and that Luke adapted it for his use in the hght of his infancy narratives by adding as parenthesis the words "as was sup- posed" ? If so, what is the relation of the document G conception of the generation of Jesus to that set forth by the infancy sections of Matthew and Luke ? //. Document M compared with Other Documents A. DOCUMENT M COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT G Comparisons have been made under I:B above. B. DOCUMENT M COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT MK The Right Eye and the Right Hand Document M §5 Documext MK 9:42-48 A Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shall not commit adulterj-: but I say unto you, that everv one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. B And whosoever shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stumble, it were better for him if a great millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. C And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, C And if thy hand cause thee to stumble, cut it pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is oflF: it is good for thee to enter into life maimed, profitable for thee that one of thy members rather than having thy two hands to go into should perish, and not thy whole body be cast hell, into the unquenchable tire. And if thy into hell. And if thy right hand causeth thee foot cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for for thee to enter into life halt, rather than hav- it is profitable for thee that one of thy members ing thy two feet to be cast into hell. And if should perish, and not thy whole body go into thine eye cause thee to stumble, cast it out: it hell. is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. Which document has the sayings of portion C in their true context ? Or is it to be held that the sayings were spoken on two different occa- sions ? Does the MK context, portion B, naturally support this con- clusion ? Or shall it be said that the connection in MK is dependent wholly upon the common presence in B and C of the single word "stumble" ? What relation does hand, foot, or eye bear to causing "one of these little ones that believe on me" to stumble ? What rela- THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 27 tion does eye or hand have to adultery, as defined by Jesus ? Does document M show the true, original context of the sayings, and docu- ment MK illustrate how a strong, vivid saying from Jesus, of an easily detachable kind, could find lodgment in a context foreign to it ? Does the MK record of the sayings show any accretions ? In what direction is the apparent tendency of those words that look like aftergrowths ? Does the study of MK 9 : 33-50 strengthen or weaken the assumption that these sayings are a part of the words of Jesus upon that occasion ?^ C. DOCUMENT M COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT P I. The Parable of the Talents or Pounds Document M §25 B For it is as when a man, going into another country, D called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. E And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one; to each according to his several ability; F and he went on his journey. Straightway he that received the five talents went and traded with them, and made other five tal- ents. In like manner he also that received the two gained other two. But he that received the one went away and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money. H Now after a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and maketh a reckoning with them. I And he that received the five talents came and brought other five talents, saying. Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five t.alents; lo, I have gained other five tal- ents. Document P §64 A And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was immediately to appear. He said therefore, B A certain nobleman went into a far coun- try, C himself a kingdom D And he called ten servants of his. E and gave them ten pounds, and said unto them, Trade ye herewith, till I come. to receive for and to return. G But his citizens hated him, and sent an ambassage after him, saying. We will not that this man reign over us. H And it came to pass when he was come back again, having received the kingdom. that he commanded these serv- ants, unto whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by trading I And the first came before him, saying, Lord, thy pound hath made ten pounds more. 1 For a study of these and related questions suggested by the MK form and loca- tion of these sayings, see pp. 67-78 and 256-63. 28 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE J His lord said unto him. Well done, good and faithful servant : thou hast been faithful over a fev? things, I will set thee over many things: K enter thou into the joy of thy lord. L And he also that re- ceived the two talents came and said. Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: lo, I have gained other two talents. M His lord said unto him. Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will set thee over many things: N enter thou into the joy of thy lord. O And he also that had received the one talent came and said,I.,ord, 1 knew thee that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou didst not sow, and gathering where thou didst not scatter: and 1 was afraid, and went away and hid thy t.alent in the earth: lo, thou hast thine own. P But his lord answered and said unto him. Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I did not scatter; thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the bankers, and at my coming I should have received back mine own with interest. Q Take ye away therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him that hath the ten talents. R For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken away. T And cast ye out the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping and gnash- ing of teeth J And he said unto him. Well done, thou good servant: because thou wast found faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities. L _ And the .second came, saying. Thy pound, Lord, hath made five pounds. M And he said unto him also, Be thou also over five cities. O And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I kept laid up in a napkin: for I feared thee, be- cause thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow. P He saith unto him. Out of thine ovra mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I am an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow; then where- fore gavest thou not my money into the bank, and I at my com- ing should have required it with interest. Q And he said unto them that stood by. Take away from him the pound, and give it unto him that hath the ten pounds And they said unto him. Lord, he hath ten pounds. R I say unto you, that unto every one that hath shall be given; but from him that hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken away from him. S Howbeit these mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me U And when he had thus spoken, he went on before, going up to Jerusalem. Is there any reasonable doubt that these are two accounts of the same parable, the differences being due to the fact that they have come down to us by two different lines of tradition ? Are the differ- ences in detail any greater than those in the two records of the Sermon THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 29 on the Mount ? Or in the two accounts of the Call of the Four ? Or in the two statements of John the Baptist's conception of the work of the Christ ? Are the portions peculiar to each document, that is, the words set to right and left above, namely, the portions K, N, T and C, H + G, S, due to the different settings which the parable came to have in the two different documents? Does the parable reach its most natural conclusion with the last verse which the two documents have in common, portion R ? And are the set-aside verses which follow in each document, portions S and T, nothing more;.than the expres- sion of the complement to certain inserted (set-aside) thoughts which have a place earlier in the record ? Is the statement about "receiv- ing the kingdom" in P, portions C and H, the result of the introduc- tion, portion A, by which the parable is preceded, and is that setting an early or a late editorial interpretation of the parable ? At what point in his career and to whom is it most hkely that Jesus spoke the parable, those given by document P or those given by Matthew ? Do the set- aside portions have any bearing upon what the parable as a whole seems intended to teach ? Is the judicial sentence with which the document M account of the parable closes one within the authority of a man such as the parable supposes ?' 2. The Parable of the Great Supper or Marriage Feast Document M §23 Document P §43 A And Jesus answered and spake again A And when one of them that sat at meat -^ h- he^rd these thmgs, he ..d^unto the kingdom of God. But he said unto him, B The king- B A certain man made a great supper; dom of heaven is likened unto a certain and he bade many : and he sent forth his king, which made a marriage feast for =^«vant at supper tmie to say o them that his son, and sent forth his servants to call were bidden, Come; for all ihmgs are now them that were bidden to the marnage ready, feast : and they would not come. Again he sent forth other servants, saying. Tell them that are bidden, Behold, I have made ready my dinner: my oxen and my fallings are killed, and all things are ready: come to the marriage feast. . , , „ ... ,u ^"^^ r,,,t C And they all with one fo««M/ be- ^,- J 1- u* f% ^ „„ttl,^;rwTl« gan to make excuse. The t^rst said unto they made light of it, and went their ways, S ^ g^,^ .^^^ j ^^^^t one to his own farm, another to his me - ^^^^ ^^^^^^ . j .j,^^ ^ave chandise: and the rest laid hold on his B^_^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^i^ j have servants, and entreated them shamefully, ^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^j ^^^^ ^^^ j ^^ ^^ prove them;' I pray thee have me ex- cused. And another said, I have mar- ried a wife, and therefore 1 cannot come. and killed them. D But the king was wroth; and he sent his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. On the problems raised by the two forms of this parable, see pp. 185-205. 30 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE E Then sailh he to his servants, The wed- E And the servant came, and told his lord ding is ready, but they that were bidden these things. Then the master of the were not worthy. Go ye therefore unto house being angry said to his servant, Go the partings of the highways, and as many out quickly into the streets and lanes of as ye shall find, bid to the marriage feast. the city, and bring in hither the poor and And those servants went out into the maimed, and blind and lame. And the highways, and gathered together all as servant said, Lord, what thou didst corn- many as they found, both bad and good: mand is done, and yet there is room. And and the wedding was filled with guests. the lord said unto the servant. Go out into the highways and hedges, and constrain them to come in, that my house may be filled. For I say unto you, that none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper F But when the king came in to behold the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding-garment : and he saith unto him. Friend, how earnest thou in hither not having a wedding-garment ? And he was speechless. Then the king said to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few chosen. Which is the more reasonable, to assume that we have here two different parables spoken on two separate occasions, or that these are two recensions of the one parable, differing in details because they have come down through two lines of tradition ? Which setting is the more natural ? Why did Matthew take this parable out of his group of document M parables of the kingdom of heaven, INI §§15-25, and set it down after the parable of document MK 12:1-12 ? Had he any other guide than the internal suggestion of the parable ? And if not, shall it be said that the actual setting assigned by document P, portion A, is more probably historical ? As to the content of the par- able, do the two unparalleled (set-aside) portions of document M call forth questions or create difficulties ? May it be said with reason that the portion D reflects the experience of history, being a growth upon the parable resulting from the destruction of Jerusalem ? Regarded as an original part of the parable, is it or is it not unwarrantedly drastic treatment ? And is the concluding paragraph of the docu- ment M report, portion F, in keeping with the apparent purpose of the parable ? Is a guest so pressed to take advantage of an invita- tion then to be driven out on the ground of attire ? Has any king the power to commit to a fate like that with which the document M record closes ? Since a similar fate closed the M record of the parable of the Pounds or Talents as against the P record, shall it be affirmed that this eschatological feature is a tendency of the M document ? THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 3 1 3- Document M §2 The Parable of the Ten Virgins Document P §27 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be 1 kened Let your Inms bo K> 1;'' -^ '""'./"^ «"^^^^ unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went burning; and be- > ';>/;' [^';^;t,.''r""'"'^^,'J^X forth to meet the bridegroom. And tive of them ing for their Cr.l. uh n ''^ ,f f' ^^ "^" V'^^^',^* were foolish and five were wise. For the foolish, marriage feast; that, wh.n he comcth ana knock, when they took Uieir lamps, took no oil with them: eth, they may straightway open unto him Blessed hut the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. are those servants, whom he Lord w hen he Cometh No?;hile%hrbriSroo^^^^^ they all sluJn- ^all find watching: -nly I say unto you U.at bered and slept. But at midnight there is a cry, he shall gird himself, and make theni sit down ^o Behold, the bridegroom! Come ye forth to meet m>ea , and shall ':°™e and serve them And if he him. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed sha 1 come in the second wach and if the third, and their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, fand them so, blessed are those servants. Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out. But the wise answered, saying, Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while thev went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the mar- riage feast; and the door was shut. Afterward come also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said. Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour. Ought it to be held without hesitation that the differences between the documents in this case demand that these be considered as two different parables? Is the likeness between them reducible to so small an element that they must be thought of as two differentiated treatments of the same theme ? Is that in the P document structurally so similar to the majority of Jesus' parables that there is no reason to regard it as having undergone modification ? Did the evangelist Matthew regard these as two reports of the same parable ? If not, why did he take up two of the three associated parables in P §§27-29, but drop the third in favor of the document M §24 report of it, Matt. 24:43—25:13? Shall we agree or disagree with the judgment of Matthew in this regard ? Which of the two reports retains the purest parabolic form? Was a parable dealing with the future of the Christian community more likely or less likely to undergo modifica- tion in the course of transmission than those sayings and parables of Jesus which dealt with moral and religious principles apart from prospective history? Apart from P§27, are other traces of the original parable of the Ten Virgins to be found in the somewhat con- fused §39 of document P ? Is P §39 made more inteUigible or less intelligible by regarding it as the product of a telescoping of parts of M §§13, 24? Is this tendency to enlarge the use of certain ideas in the parable of the Ten Virgins discoverable elsewhere, say, for in- stance, in the portions of M§i4 not paralleled in G§§i5, 16, as exhibited in I : B : 3 above ?' I These and related questions are considered on pp. 185-205. OF THE \ UNIVERSITY ) *&1UF0RH\& %^ 32 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE 4. The Discourse against the Pharisees Document M §27 A Then spake Jesus to the mul ti- tudes and to his disciples, saying, B The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat: all things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. C Yea, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they them- selves will not move them with their finger. D But all their works they do for to be seen of men : for they make broad their phy- lacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, E and love the chief place at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and the salutations in the market- places, G and to be called of men Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi : for one is your teacher, and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father on the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your master, even the Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall e.xalt him- self shall be humbled; and who- soever shall humble himself shall be exalted. H But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo- crites! because ye shut the king- dom of heaven against men: for ye enter not in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. I Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites 1 for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is become so, ye make him twofold more a son of hell than your- selves. Woe unto you, ye blind guides. Document P§i8' a Now as he spake, a Pharisee asketh him to dine with him: and he went in, and sat down to meat. And when the Phar- isee saw it, he marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner. And the Lord said unto him, C And one of the lawyers an- swering saith unto him, Master, in saying this thou reproachest us also. And he said, Woe unto you lawyers also! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers. E Woe unto you Pharisees! for ye love the chief seats in the synagogues, and the salutations in the market-places. Document MK 12:38-40 And in his teaching he said, E Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and to have salutations in the market- places, and chief seats in the synagogues, and chief places at feasts: F they which devour widows' houses, and for a pre- tence make long prayers; these shall receive greater condemna- tion. H Woe unto you lawyers I for ye took away the key of knowledge : ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. I The document M order of sayings is followed; therefore P here is not set down in its own order. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 33 ■which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor. Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that hath sanctified the gold? And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, he is a debtor. Ye blind : for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sancti- fieth the gift ? He therefore that sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. And he that sweareth by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. And he that sweareth by the heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. J Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, judgement, and mercy, and faith: but these ve ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel. K Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within thev are full from extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the out- side thereof may become clean also. L Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear beauti- ful, but inwardly are full of dead men's bones, and of all unclean- ness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. M Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye build the sepulchres of the proph- ets, and garnish the tombs of the righteous, and say. If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye witness to yourselves, that ye are sons of them that slew the proph- ets. N Fill ye up then the mea- sure of your fathers. Ye ser- pents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgement of hell? J But woe unto you Pharisees! " For ye tithe mint and rue and every herb, and pass over judge- ment and the love of God: but these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. K Now do ye Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter; but your inward part is full of extortion and wickedness. Ye foolish ones, did not he that made the outside make the inside also? Howbeit give for alms those things which are within; and behold, all things are clean unto you. L Woe unto you ! for ye are as the tombs which appear not, and the men that walk over them know it not. M Woe unto you! for ye build the tombs of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. So ye are witnesses and consent unto the works of your fathers: for they killed them, and ye build their tonibs. N Therefore also said the wis- dom of God, I will send unto them prophets and apostles; and some of them they shall kill and persecute; that the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the worid, may be required of this genera- tion; from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zachariah, who perished between the altar and the .sanctuary; yea, I say unto you, it shall be required of this generation 34 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE So large a part of the discourse against the Pharisees as reported by the Gospel of Matthew is without parallels in the other gospels as to make it apparent that he drew in large measure from another source, document M. But it may not be asserted that what he has in com- mon with documents P or MK he received from P or MK. To decide that problem requires, on the one hand, a study of all the passages in the Gospel of Matthew which are derivable from document P, for the determination of how closely Matthew is accustomed to follow his document in verbal details; and it requires, on the other hand, an examination of those sayings which in the above discourse are common to P and Matthew, for the determination of the question whether they show a wider divergence from P than is the case in any other sayings derivable from P. Such a comparative study seems to put it beyond reasonable doubt that document M contained sub- stantially every saying in both P and MK on this subject.^ The very notable superiority of the report as above credited to document M, both in the clearness and forcefulness of individual sayings and in the orderUness of the thought as a whole, is evident on a superficial exam- ination. And it recalls the superiority, in similar features, of the document M account of the Sermon on the Mount as compared with document G. That Matthew made use of the P report before com- pleting his record of the discourse is discoverable, however, by observ- ing that he added to the document M report that saying which stands above as the close to the P report. Matt. 23:34-36. And to this he added yet another document P paragraph, P §426. As to the chronological setting of the discourse, neither document M nor document MK gives it so precise an introduction as to require its location in connection with some event, though MK puts it in a suitable general period and in relation to preceding events which are fitting. Document P, however, sets it in very definite relation with specific occurrences, portion A. Did Jesus speak twice on the theme, or must it be held that such outspoken denunciation of the religious leaders was probably reserved by Jesus until the closing days, as the MK record suggests ? And are the document P introductions an endeavor, probably preceding the Lukan use of the document, to give narrative setting to sayings? Does the document P reference to Jesus as "the Lord" in this introduction, and in other introductions to I See p. 5, n. i. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 35 sayings in P, imply that these introductions took form late in the history of the tradition ?' It will be observed that the document M report of the discourse ends in portion N with a statement of fate for the scathed Pharisees and scribes very different from that which is assigned to them by document P, portion N. In the latter there is a prediction of the coming upon that generation of some calamitous retribution for their headstrong and violent opposition to a messenger who might have proved the national savior from messianic fanaticism. This found its adequate fulfilment in the destruction of Jerusalem and the national life by the Romans in a. d. 70. But in document M the fate of the Pharisees seems to be carried over into another world, "how shall ye escape the judgement of hell ?" Does the evidence which has been accumulating stamp document M as having a strong eschatologi- cal tendency ? There is the eschatological close to the Sermon on the Mount, I:B:3 above, unsupported by document G. There is the eschatological close to the parable of the Talents or Pounds together with certain eschatological phrases in the body of it, II:C: i above, unsupported by document P. There is the eschatological close to the parable of the Great Supper or Marriage Feast, II:C:2 above, apparently foreign to the thought of the parable and unsup- ported by document P. And now the discourse against the Pharisees is marked by the same type of conclusion, not only unsupported by P, but against the testimony of P to a very different conclusion. In the face of these phenomena, shall it be affirmed that document M seems to exhibit a marked movement toward the emphasis of the eschatological element ? It is worth observing also that the strongest statements attributed to Jesus in the support of the Old Testament law are derived from document M, M §3 and the first non-paralleled portion (B) of M §27 above. 5. Certain Minor Sayings Document M §2 Document P §45 Document MK 9:50 hnrfftt"^ ^u^'^^'S"^.-^^ *="""= Salt therefore is good: but if Salt is good: but if the salt hive whe ewuVfhalf U he ^ ufnT"-; 'T '\^^\^T- '°,!' "* ^''^^•°"/' '°^' ''^ ^=''"^-- wherewith will^e ^ therpLtV, L H f f. • ■' wherewith shal it be seasoned? season it ? Have salt in yourselves IS thenceforth good for nothing, It is ht neither for the land nor for and be at peace one with another but to be cast out and trodden the dunghill: wm cast it out. He peace one witn another, under foot of men. that hath ears to hear, let him hear. ' Of the thirteen instances in the Synoptics, ten arc in document P and all of ihem in the Gospel of Luke. The single instance of a disciple si)eaking of Jesus as "the Lord" also is peculiar to Luke (Luke 24:34). 36 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE DocmiENT M §2 Document P §17 Document Mk 4:21 Ve are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a lamp, and No man, when he hath lighted And he said unto them. Is the put it under the bushel, but on a lamp, putteth it in a cellar, lamp brought to be put under the the stand; and it shineth unto all neither under the bushel, but on bushel, or under the bed, and not that are in the house. Even so the stand, that they which enter to be put on the stand ? let your light shine before men, in may see the light, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. Document M §3 Document P §51 Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven But it is easier for heaven and and earth pass away, one jot or earth to pass away, than for one one tittle shall in no wise pass tittle of the law to fall. away from the law, till all things be accomplished. Of these three sayings which follow consecutively in the Gospel of Matthew it may not be affirmed that those portions which are found in document P did appear also in document M, for obviously Matthew may have taken them from P, or, indeed, two of them from document MK. It is largely a question for personal decision as to the degree in which they seem an integral and essential part of their present context in Matthew. They are all sayings of a kind that permits their transmission in completely detached form; at the same time they seem, on the whole, natural parts of the paragraphs in which they now stand in Matthew. No one of the three bears close relation to its context in document P; therefore, on the testimony of docu- ment P, they would not very reasonably be regarded as sayings repeated on different occasions. Of the two which are also in document MK it is to be said that each of them is there found in an appropriate con- text. The first forms an impressive close to Jesus' rebuke of the disciples for their contention about place, MK 9:33-50; the second is an integral part of a unified paragraph, MK 4:21-25, which is re- garded by Luke as so essential a part of the discourse that he takes it up there despite its reappearance in document P. Perhaps the saying about "salt" was twice spoken, once as M §2 and again as MK 9:5o = P§45. It may have been the same with that about "light," once asM§2 = P§i7 and again as MK 4:21. A decision is not essential for the purposes of the present study. ///. Document MK compared with Other Documents A. DOCUMENT MK COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT G Comparisons have been made under I : A above. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 37 B. DOCUMENT MK COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT M Comparisons have been made under II : B above. C. DOCUMENT MK COMPARED WITH DOCUMENT P Comparisons Where Sayings Occur not Only in MK and P but in M Also Are Made under ii:C:4, 5 above, and under 21 Below 2. The Mission of the Disciples Document MK§3i a And he called unto him the twelve, and began to send them forth by two and two; and he gave them authority over the unclean spirits; C and he charged them that they should take nothing for their journey, save a staff only; no bread, no wallet, no money in their purse; but lo go shod with sandals: and, said he, put not on two coats. D And he said unto them. Wheresoever ye enter into a house, there abide till ye depart thence. F And whatsoever place shall not receive you, and they hear you not, as ye go forth thence, shake off the dust that is under your feet for a testimony unto them. Document P §§3, 4 A Now after these things the Lord appointed seventy others, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he him- self was about to come. B And he said unto them, The harvest is plenteous, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send forth labourers into his harvest. Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves. C Carry no purse, no wallet, no shoes: and salute no man on the way. D .And into whatsoever house ye shall enter, first say, Peace be to this house. And if a son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon him: but if not, it shall turn to you again. And in that same house re- main, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. E And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you: and heal the sick that are therein, and say unto them. The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you. F But into whatsoever city ye shall enter, and they receive you not, go out into the streets thereof and say. Even the dust from your city, that cleaveth to our feet, we do wipe off against you: howbeit know this, that the kingdom of God is come nigh. I say unto you. It shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city. It is perhaps impossible with the evidence at hand in these days to determine whether the disciples made one or more than one tour in the lifetime of Jesus. Does the fact that no single document knows of more than one tour suggest that there was one only ? Apart from the numbers that are said to have been sent out, do the other details of the narrative require that it be held that there were two distinct tours ? As has been seen, Matthew solved the problem by com- bining documents MK and P on this subject, Matt. 9 : 37 — 10 : 16. The number sent out he did not have to record since he did not represent the instructions as applying to a mission within the lifetime of Jesus. Because Luke was faithful to his documents as units he included both 38 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE tours, apparently recognizing that an omission from either MK or P, in this case, would destroy the contextual relations. 3. Reception in the Mission DocuviENT MK 9:37 Document P §6 Whosoever shaU receive one of such litUe chil- . He that heareth you heareth me; and he that re- dren in mv name, receiveth me: and whosoever re- jected you rejecteth me; and he that rejecteth me ceiveth me. receiveth not me, but him that sent me. rejecteth him that sent me. In document P the saying is a part of that discourse which was spoken in connection with the mission; in document MK it is a part of the rebuke of the Twelve because of their ambitions for place. Do both the form and the setting require it to be regarded as a repeated saying ? If so, what does it mean in its MK context ? How can it be normally interpreted and yet held to bear a definite relation to the problem with which Jesus was deahng at that time, unworthy ambi- tion in the disciples ? Precisely stated, what do?s it mean to " receive one of such little children in my name" ? And how is such receiving a receiving of Jesus ? Would the MK verse be freed from the diffi- culties now inherent if "one of such httle children" were regarded as an equivalent for " a disciple of mine" ? Would its thought then be substantially different from that of the P parallel ? But even with such an understanding of the content of "one of such little children" is the verse appropriate to the occasion to which MK assigns it? Does its sole fitness for its present context depend upon the phrase "one of such little children" ? How interpret the MK verse so that the act for which it calls is both intelligible and practicable, and at the same time calculated to be a rebuke to ambitious disciples ?' 4. The Charge of League with Beelzebub Document MK §18 Document P §16 A And he was casting out a devil which was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb man spake; and the multi- tudes marvelled. B And the scribes which came down from Jeru- B But some of then^ said By salem said. He hath Beelzebub, and, By the prince Beelzebub the pnnce of the devUs casteth he out ■ of the devils casteth he out the devils. devils. C .^nd others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from heaven. D And he D But he, knowing their called them unto him, and said unto them in thoughts, said unto them. Every- kingdom divided parables. How can Satan cast out Satan? And against itself is brought to desolation, and a ff a kingdom be divided against itself, that king- house rfixirffrf against a house f^'f'h. And f dom >;mn.,t M.ind. And if a house be divided Satan also is divided against himself, how shall against ii^ilf. ihat house will not be able to stand. his kingdom stand ? because ye say that 1 cast out And if Sii.in liiith risen up against himself, and devils by Beelzebub. is divi.lcil, hi' lannot stand, but hath an end. I The difficulties which seem to confront one who would find a satisfying interpre- tation for the saying in MK are considered on pp. 67-78. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 39 F Hut no one can enter into the house of the strong »uii!, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house. H Verily I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: but whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: because they said. He hath an unclean spirit. E And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your .sons cast them out ? therefore shall they be your judges. But if I by the finger of God cast out devils, then is the kingdom of God come upon you. F When the strong man fully armed guardeth his own court, hisgoods are in peace: but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him his whole armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. G He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. Document P §21 H And every one who shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit it shall not be forgiven. The extreme faithfulness of the evangehst Luke to the order of his documents as he found them is perhaps nowhere better illustrated than in his apparent unwilHngness to disturb P even to the extent of bringing P §21 into such relation to P §16 as would give him the con- text corresponding to that of document MK. This is remarkable, especially when it is observed how fundamentally P §21 is related in thought to P §16, a relation so close that it would occur to a reader apart from its suggestion by document MK. It is not as if P §21 were contextually related also in its present position, for this will hardly be held. How very different is the method of Matthew, who unites MK§i8, P§i6, and P§2i into a continuous narrative, Matt. 12 : 22-32. It will be agreed that the P contributions to this narrative are of the very highest significance. 5. The True Kindred of Jesus Document MK § 19 And there come his mother and his brethren; and, standing without, they sent unto him, calling him. Andamultitude was sitting about him; and they say unto him. Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. And he answereth them, and saith. Who is my mother and niy bre- thren ? And looking round on them which sat round about him, he saith. Behold, my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. Document P §16 And it came to pass, as he said the.se things, a certain woman out of the multitude lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Bles.sed is the womb that bare thee, and the breasts which thou didst suck. But he said. Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. Because in document MK this paragraph is the sequel to the charge of league with Beelzebub, and in document P is a part of the section relating that charge, it was suggested at a previous point in this study that these are two differing accounts of one event. This 40 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE cannot be demonstrated, but its possibility suggests the setting of the two records in parallelism. 6. A Sign from Heaven DociiMENT MK 8: II, 12 Document P §16 A And the Pharisees came forth, and began to A And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign question with him, seeking of him a sign from from heaven, heaven, tempting him. B And he sighed deeply in B And when the multitudes were gathering to- his spirit, and saith. Why doth this generation gether unto him, he began to say. This generation seek a sign ? verily I say unto you. There shall no is an evil generation: it seeketh after a sign; and sign be given unto this generation. there shall no sign be given to it C but the sign of Jonah. For even as Jonah became a sign unto the Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be to this generation. Does the documentary evidence require that this request and reply be considered as repeated on two different occasions ? Certainly the influence of the document P record is to be seen in the case of Mat- thew, who in taking over the narrative at the document MK point, MK 8: 1 1-13 = Matt. 16:1-4, added "but the sign of Jonah." 7. The Leaven of the Pharisees Document MK 8:14-17 Document P §19 .\nd they forgot to take bread; and they had not And when he was come out from thence, the in the boat with them more than one loaf. And he scribes and the Pharisees began to press upon him charged them, saying. Take heed, beware of the vehemently, and to provoke him to speak of many leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod. things; laying wait for him, to catch something out And they reasoned one with another, saying. We of his mouth have no bread. And Jesus perceiving it saith un- In the mean time, when the many thousands of to them. Why reason ye, because ye have no bread ? the multitude were gathered together, insomuch do ye not yet perceive, neither understand ? have that they trode one upon another, he began to say ye your heart hardened ? unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. Is the circumstantiahty of setting such as demands the behef that this saying was spoken twdce ? What bearing on the question has the fact that the following section in document P forms only an apparent and artificial junction with this saying ? And if the discourse against the Pharisees which forms the preceding section in P was spoken in the last days of Jesus' public activity rather than here, as is suggested by document MK, what remains of the P setting of this saying? If P §18 belongs elsewhere and P §17 is related in thought neither to P§i8 nor to P§i6, this saying in P§i9 may once have stood in immediate conjunction with the reply of Jesus to a request for a sign, P §i6K-N, as it does also in the MK document, MK 8:11-17. It is a saying which would easily be remembered and handed down apart from any original context; but also, it may be said, one which may have come more than once from the lips of Jesus. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 41 8. The Mystery of the Kingdom of God Document MK §21 Document P §20 And he said unto them, Is the lamp hrouuhl to be put under the bushel, or under tlic lioil, ,nid not But there is nothing covered up, that shall not to be put on the stand? For there is notluiiK hid, be revealed: and hid, that shall not be known. save that it should be manifested; neither was Wherefore, whatsoever ye have said in the darkness anything made secret, but that it should come to shall be heard in the light; and what ye have spoken light, if any man hath ears to hear, let him hear. in the ear in the inner chambers shall be proclaimed And he said unto them. Take heed what ye hear: upon the housetops Each setting of this saying about the hid and secret or covered which is to be manifested or revealed in the future is appropriate, yet the two settings are very different. That of MK belongs to the period when "the mystery of the kingdom" was being revealed to the dis- ciples themselves; that of document P to the time when the disciples were being instructed to speak freely of that "mystery" to others, in the prosecution of the mission about which Jesus was instructing them. Each appearance of the saying sheds light upon its meaning in its other context. Both illuminate the thought of Jesus in his phrase "the mystery of the kingdom of God." 9. Confession or Denial under Persecution Document MK 8:38 Document P §20 A And I say unto you. Every one who shall con- fess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: B For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of B but he that deni- ray words in this adulterous and sinful generation, eth me m the presence of msn shall be denied in the Son of man also shall be ashamed of him, the presence of the angels of God. when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels As the conclusion of a considerable body of sayings on the mission of the disciples and the attendant persecutions, P §20, these words of Jesus have a highly appropriate, historical setting. May the same be said about their place in document MK ? Apart from the saying in MK 9: i, by which these words are followed, do they bear a close relation in thought to their context, MK 8:34—9:1? Is the mission of the disciples the theme of the conversation of Jesus on this occasion ? When he speaks of losing the life, MK 8:35, does he refer solely or primarily to the destruction of the life of the body by persecu- tors ? Yet, under drastic persecution might not the early community take the words to refer practically ahogether to violence to the body ? If so, would this saying about denial tend to steady the faltering, and because of this value become attached to these words which were taken to refer to persecution ? And was further comfort found in the 42 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE attached promise, MK 9:1? Is it unreasonable to regard both MK 8: 38 and 9 : i as genuine sayings of Jesus which have found a place at this point in document MK not because they were spoken in connec- tion with what precedes but because what precedes was taken to refer primarily to the treatment of the disciples by their persecutors ? And does the difference in form between the above MK and P reports of the saying result from the fact that the MK record is contiguous to the saying in MK 9:1?' 10. The Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit Document MK§i8 Document P§2i Verily I sav unto you, All their sins shall be for- And e\'ery one who shall speak a word against given unto the sons of men, and their blasphemies the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: but who- him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit it soever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath shall not be forgiven never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: It has been observed that this saying seems to have its true context in MK §18. Its lack of thought relation to P §§20, 22 seems evident. As to the verbal form of the saying, it may be a question which report more accurately expresses the probable thought of Jesus. 11. Attitude of Disciples under Prosecution Document MK 13 : :i Docltment P §22 And when they lead you lo judgement, and deliver And when they bring you before the s>'nagogues, you up, be not anxious beforehand what ye shall and the rulers, and the authorities, be not anxious speak: but whatsoever shall be given you in that how or what ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very the Holy Ghost. hour what ye ought to say. Though it seems difficult to hold that P §21 is related in thought to either P §20 or P §22, there seems to be very close affinity between P §§22 and P §20, that is, a single consistent topic results from the assignment of P §21 to the document MK context, and the bringing together of the two sections of document P which are separated by it. This theme is the mission of the disciples and the attendant persecu- tions. But this is precisely the theme of the paragraph in document MK to which the above saying belongs, MK 13:9-13. Shall it be held then that Jesus spoke twice on this subject? Theoretically there is nothing against this general supposition. The evangelist Matthew decided to represent Jesus as treating the theme once fully, and again by mere brief reference. To this end he combined docu- I The problems raised by the context of this saying in document MK are con- sidered on pp. 79-81. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 43 ment MK 13:9-13 with document P §§20, 22 and with such other sayings on the subject as he could find in his sources from first to last, Matt. 9 : 35 — 10: 42. Ought we to concur in his judgment on this problem? Are the portions P §§20, 22 so bound up with their con- text that it must be supposed that they were spoken at the indefinite time indicated by the P document ? At what period in the fife of Jesus is it most likely that he would deal with the future of his dis- ciples, in the last days or at a period when they did not believe that he was about to be taken away from them ? Matthew believed that P §§28, 29 belonged in the final discourse of Jesus on the future, MK 13 = Matt. 24, 25, and placed them there. Matt. 24:43-51. Shall we agree with his judgment, and take a step farther by suggesting that he would better have left MK 13 : 9-13 in its place there and have brought to it P §§20, 22, than have placed both in connection with the MK account of the sending-out of the disciples as he does ? Does docu- ment MK record only a part of the final discourse of Jesus on the future, and are other sections of that address in the last hours to be found at different points in the unarticulated but highly valuable docu- ment P ? Does the comparison of the two above reports of a saying about attitude under prosecution require that such a possibility be considered ?' 12. The Baptism of Jesus Document MK 10:38, 39 Document P §31 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye I came to cast fire upon the earth; and what will ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I drink ? or I, if it is already kindled ? But I have a baptism to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it with ? And they said unto him, We are able. And be accomplished ! Jesus said unto them, The cup that I drink ye shall drink; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized: Both form and context necessitate the conclusion that a thought of Jesus is expressed here to which he gave utterance on more than one occasion. But since the occasion of the document P saying is not made clear, it may not now be learned with certainty. What follows in P, Matthew placed with other sayings that seemed to deal with the period of the mission. Matt., chap. 10; what precedes, Matthew believed to have a better place in the final discourse on the future, Matt., chaps. 24, 25, Since Matthew's treatment of the mission in Matt., chap. TO, was future, and not present as in document MK at that point, I The whole subject is reviewed on pp. 140-49. 202-5. 44 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE he involved himself in no serious inconsistency by thus separating allied material in P. But in the process P §§30, 31 were dropped out by Matthew, the latter probably for the same reason as led him to omit the references to baptism when taking over the document MK report as Matt. 20:22, 23. To what period of the life of Jesus shall it be said that P §§30, 31 belong ? Document P neither says nor suggests anything decisive in answer. 13. The Parable of the Mustard Seed DocuiiENT MK §23 Document P §37 And he said, How shall we liken the kingdom of He said therefore. Unto what is the kingdom of God ? or in what parable shall we set it forth ? It God like ? and whereunto shall I liken it .•' It is is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is like unto a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, sown upon the earth, though it be less than all the and cast into his own garden; and it grew, and seeds that are upon the earth, yet when it is sown, became a tree; and the birds of the heaven lodged groweth up, and becometh greater than all the in the branches thereof, herbs, and putteth out great branches; so that the birds of the heaven can lodge imder the shadow thereof. Document MK and document M each contain a group of parables of the kingdom of God, MK §§20-24, M §§15-25. There are none in document G. Akhough document P contains a large number of parables, there are two only which are designated as parables of the kingdom, those in P §37. Of these, that of the mustard seed is in the MK group also. This relates both parables of P §37 fundamentally to that MK group. And since the setting of this body of parables in document MK is so circumstantial and clear, while the two in P have apparently no attachment whatever to their context, our judgment may well follow that of Matthew in regarding them as parables of the same occasion, spoken in exposition of "the mystery of the kingdom." 14. The First Last and the Last First Document MK 10:31 Document P §41 But many thai are first shall be last; and the last And behold, there are last which shall be first, first. and there are first which shall be last. The two contexts are very different. Luke seems to have decided that having used the saying in its document P position he ought not to take it up when he found it in the MK document, MK 10:30, 31 = Luke 18:30. 15. The Sabbath Question Document MK §15 Document P §43 And he saith unto them. Is it Lawful on the sab- And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and bath day to do good, or to do harm ? to save a life, Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath, or to kill ? But they held their peace. or not ? But they held their peace. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 45 This is a question said to have been raised by Jesus in connection with the heahng of a man with a withered hand, document MK, and again, document P, a man with the dropsy. 16. The Cost of DisciPLEsmp DoruMENT MK 8:34 Document P §44 A And he called unto him the multitude with his A Now there went with him great multitudes disciples, and said unto them, and he turned, and said unto them, 15 If any man Cometh unto me, and hateth not his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. C If any man would C Whosoever doth not bear his own come after me, let him deny himself, and take up cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. his cross, and follow me. It would seem clear from a study of the whole of P §44 that Jesus is endeavoring there to define the conditions of discipleship in a broad way, and without special reference to the future mission of those who were to be propagandists. There is no hint that the require- ments outlined are those special ones imposed by a state of persecu- tion. They are regarded rather as normal and constant demands upon all of those who would be true followers of Jesus. The words are addressed to "great muhitudes" who are attaching themselves to him without a sense of what is involved in discipleship. Similarly in MK 8:34-37 Jesus seems engaged in defining his conception of discipleship, or, in impersonal terms, "fife." The above paralleled saying is therefore a repeated saying, forming in each case a part of a unified paragraph on discipleship or "life." To this interpretation there is perhaps one objection only, the presence of MK 8:38, which seems to narrow the thought in what precedes so that its application is primarily to the state of persecution. May it reasonably be said that, since MK 8:38 forms an obstacle to so normal an interpretation of both MK 8:34-37 and P §44, it must be regarded, as suggested under 9 above, as a saying which has its true context not here but in P §20 ?• 17. Divorce with Remarriage defined as Adultery Document MK 10:11, 12 Document P §52 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put Every one that putteth away his wife, and mar- away his wife, and marry another, committeth rieth another, committeth adultery: and he that adultery against her: and if she herself shall put marrieth one that is put away from a husband away her husband, and marry another, she com- committeth adultery, mitteth adultery. ' It is not thought worth while to exhibit the appearances of "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear" in P §45; MK §§20, 21; M §15. 46 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE It seems difficult to find the slightest connection between this say- ing and its P context; indeed, it seems to have found about as unfor- tunate conjunction as possible, since it comes as close as any utterance of Jesus to abrogating the law, P §51. Its setting in MK, however, is convincingly historical. But having used P as a whole, Luke did not take up what he regarded as the MK equivalent, MK 10:2-12. As to the form of the saying, it may not be assumed that because the P record is without suitable setting it is therefore inferior in content. It will be observed that the MK words, " against her," materially alter the sense of the saying, reducing, perhaps, the rigor of the utterance. Shall it be said that this is in the Hne of the movement which is seen at its strongest in Matthew, where in the use of this saying he each time modifies its apparent rigor by adding "saving for the cause of fornication," Matt. 5:32 = P§52; Matt. ipig^MK 10:11, 12? 18. Occasions of Stumbling Document MK o : 42 Document P §54 A And he said unto his disciples, It is impossible but that occasions of stumbling should come: but woe unto him, through whom they come. B And whosoever shall cause one of these little B It were well for him if a millstone were hanged ones that believe on me to stumble, it were better about his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, for him if a great millstone were hanged about his rather than that he should cause one of these little neck, and he were cast into the sea. ones to stumble. To whom did Jesus refer by the phrase, "these httle ones" ? The answer is not made clear by the P context; the MK narrative as a whole suggests that they are none other than little children, MK 9:36, 37. Could it be said of a child, of such an age that it might be taken in the arms, that it is capable of belief on Jesus — "these little ones that believe on me"? And how cause so young a child "to stumble" ? By what use of hand, foot, or eye, MK 9:43-48 ?' 19. The Power of Faith Document MK ii : 20-23 Document P §55 A And as they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away from the roots. And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Rabbi, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away. B And Jesus answering saith unto B And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase them. Have faith in God. our faith. C Verily I say unto you, C .And llie Lord said. If ye have faith as a Whosoever shall say unto this mountain. He thou grain nl imislard .seed, ye would say unto this taken up and cast into the sea; and shall not doubt .syiainiiK' Irii', Be thou rooted up, and be thou in his heart, but shall believe that what he saith planted in the sea; and it would have obeyed you. Cometh to pass; he .shall have it. ' The problems presented by MK 9:36-50 are considered on pp. 67-78. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 47 The saying is definitely related to an event in document MK; can the same be said of document P ? Is faith asked for in P in order to be able to forgive an offender seven times, P §54? If so, does the kind of power in faith which Jesus describes meet that moral need? Does the designation of the disciples as "apostles" suggest that this introduction, portion B, is of late origin ? Does " the Lord," portion C, suggest the same ? In connection with the withering of a tree (portion A), would it be more natural for Jesus to define greater power by reference to a greater act on a like object (portion C of document P), rather than by reference to the removal of a mountain (portion C of document MK) ? What relation does what follows in P §56 bear to this saying ? Luke seems to have believed that P and MK refer to one event, for, having used P §55, he omitted MK 11:20-25. Matthew, on the other hand, finds a place for P by substitutmg it, modified by MK, at Matt. 17:20 for MK 9:29. 20. The Way of Life DOCUMENT MK 8 : 35-37 DocuMEKT P §60 gospel's shall save it. For what doth it profat a man, to gain the whole world, and forfeit his life ? For what should a man give in exchange for his life t This is a pregnant saying which, from its very nature, one would expect to find repeated in the discourses of Jesus. In document MK it is part of a strong and searching definition of the conditions of dis- cipleship. But is it intelligible in its P context? There it cannot possibly mean more than the life of the body, it would seem. And even restricted to that, what meaning has it in the light of that context ? Have its two parts any real relation to the conditions which that para- graph is describing? Does this appearance of the saying in a con- text so foreign indicate that, at the most, it received in the early apostolic age an application to the body alone ? And does this account for the addition to this saying in document MK of other sayings of Jesus which really were intended by Jesus to have reference to perse- cution, namely, MK 8:38 = P §20 end?' X These and related questions are considered on p. 130, n. i. In that connection there is brought under review the words of document P §60, "But first must he suffer many things and be rejected of this generation," words which deal with a subject treated by Jesus in document MK 8:31; 9:31; 10:33. 48 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE 21. The Law of Increase and Decrease Document MK 4:25 Document P §64 DocuiiENr M §25 For he that hath, to him shall I say unto you. that unto For unto every one that hath be given: and he that hath not, every one that hath shall be shall be given, and he shall have from him shall be taken away given-, but from him that hath abundance: but from him that even that which he hath. not. even that which he hath hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken away from him. shall be taken away. This saying appears in documents M and P as an integral part of the parable of the Pounds or Talents. It is quite as intimately bound up with the paragraph in which it appears in document MK. In all documents it has reference to the use by the disciples of their powers. 22. The Rise of Messlanic Claimants DoctJMENT MK 13:21 Document P §60 And then if any man shall say unto you. Lo, here And they shall say to you, Lx), there! Lo, here! is the Christ; or, Lo, there; believe i/ not : go not away, nor follow after //few; As the records now stand, this saying has a place in two widely separated and very different contexts. In document MK it is a part of the final discourse on the future ; in document P it occurs in a para- graph which is connected with the answer of Jesus to the question of the Pharisees about the coming of the kingdom of God. Evidently the saying refers in both settings to the same future condition, a his- torical situation seen and forecast by Jesus. Is it to be regarded as a repeated saying, spoken under different circumstances and as a part of different prophetic utterances ? Or is it possible that between P§6o and the thirteenth chapter of document MK there is some historical relationship which has been obscured by the settings of document P ? Was P §60 so certainly spoken as the outcome and continuation of the situation in P §59 that it would be an act of his- torical violence to separate them and assign them to different occa- sions ? Is it true that the bond between P §59 and P §60 goes deeper than the presence in both of the phrase "Lo, there! Lo, here!"? Are the document P settings of the sayings of Jesus as a whole so historically convincing that a time relationship must be conceded to exist between the saying to the Pharisees in P § 59 and that to the disciples in P §60? 23. The Day of the Son of Man Document MK 13:15, 16 Document P §60 And let him that is on the housetop not go down. In that day, he which shall be on the housetop, nor enter in, to take anything out of his house: and and his goods in the house, let him not go down to let him that is in the field not return back to take take them away: and let him that is in the field like- his doke. wise not return back. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 49 In document MK this saying is applied to the destruction of Jerusalem; in document P it forms a part of the vivid description of the day of the Son of man. To which of these is it more appropriate ? Can any reasonable meaning be found for it in its document MK setting ? Does the siege of a city come upon men so suddenly, and at once so shut off all opportunity for provision in behalf of flight that men must simply stand fixed in the spot where they are when the dread hour falls upon them ? Does an army arise as by magic and surround a city even while the farmer is absent from the city upon his farm, so that he may not return from the field except at the risk of his life ? As an integral part of the intended portrayal of the day of the Son of man, primarily characterized by suddenness and instan- taneousness, this saying is intelligible and most impressive. It seems difficult to affirm the same of it when made a portion of definite instruc- tions as to a mode of procedure in the time of the siege of Jerusalem. The evangelist Luke seems to have felt the incongruity of the saying in its document MK context, for he rewrites it at that point in such manner as to frame really practicable injunctions for a state of siege, Luke 21:21. Ought the presence of this saying in document MK to be regarded as another indication that there is some historical rela- tion between the discourse in P §60 and that in the thirteenth chapter of document MK ? The fact that the saying is preserved in this dis- course of MK, despite its lack of relation to the immediate context given it there, suggests strongly that the saying does belong to that discourse, and needs only some shift of location within the discourse in order to be fitting and intelligible. But where in that discourse as it now stands in the thirteenth chapter of document MK can the saying be placed with satisfying resufis? That document P§6o and the thirteenth chapter of document MK should have two sayings in com- mon, and that one of these is appropriate to P but out of place in MK, seem hardly to be without some real significance as to a historical relationship between these now separated portions. The evangeUst Matthew certainly thought that they ought to be regarded as parts of one discourse, for he distributed P §60 through his report of this final discourse, Matt., chap. 24.' I For an exhibit of the distribution, see pp. 64-67. 5© THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE §5. Results of Comparison of Document with Document At the opening of the section on the comparison of document with document, it was proposed to bring under review all passages which occur in more than one document. This has now been fully done. It was said that such a comparison would yield resuhs bearing directly upon the teaching of Jesus about the future. That this is the case will become more apparent in subsequent discussions. At this point, however, there may be summarized certain constructive suggestions which have resulted from the comparative study. 1. Wherever documents G and MK have material in common, and thus a basis for comparison, document G makes the impression of being nearer to the facts than document MK. The document G record of the message of John, of the opening method and message of Jesus, of the manner in which Jesus attached followers to himself, of the location of the saying about "what measure ye mete," all seem to be more intelligible and historical than those of document MK. 2. At such points as it is possible to compare documents G and M, the superiority seems to be on the side of document G. The Beati- tudes of M have a form which it is more natural to regard as deriva- tive than that of G; M presents a larger number. In the contrasts with the Old Testament law, G seems the more faithful in preserving the hard sayings, but is less orderly than M. To the contrast of the good and the corrupt tree M appears to have given an eschatological addition. 3. All indications tend in the direction of lessening the worth which is to be attached to the order of events and the setting of sayings as they appear in document P. The introductions which that docu- ment supphes to both narrative and discourse have elements which suggest a late rather than an early period in the history of the tradition. 4. Certain sayings which are hardly intelligible in one docu- ment have such a setting in another that they are easy of understand- ing. It seems fair to assume, therefore, that these are not repeated sayings, but sayings which in the context where they are difficult of interpretation are not in their true setting. 5. Certain parables seem to have found a place in two different documents, but in each document contain elements not appearing in the other. These extra elements seem to be additions adapting the THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 51 parable to the setting given it by the document, or additions adapting the parable to the seeming tendency of the document, for example, the eschatological trend of document M. 6. That there is an eschatological tendency in document M finds support not only in these apparent additions to parables, but also in the eschatological conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount, and in the same type of close to the discourse against the Pharisees. If, further, there be made an examination of such parts of document M as have not yet been brought under review, it will be observed that it is this document which supplies the most extended eschatological statement found in the Synoptic Gospels, M §26, and that it reports two par- ables from Jesus, the reputed interpretations of which by Jesus are wholly eschatological in content, M§§i5, 18. 7. There are evidences within several documents of the tendency to be affected by history as it actually developed. Thus document MK represents John the Baptist as promising that the Christ would baptize with the Holy Ghost; it credits to Jesus as his opening mes- sage a statement as to impending crisis which is not derivable from the definitely placed sayings of Jesus previous to the latest period in his ministry. Certain non-paralleled portions of the reports of the parables seem to be the outgrowth of the desolation wrought by the Roman war. The persecutions suffered by the early Christian com- munity seem to be reflected in the tendency to interpret the sayings of Jesus about the loss of "life" as referring solely to the death of the body, and in the consequent addition to these sayings of other sayings of Jesus, spoken on a different occasion, which have power to steady the believer under persecution, for example, the attachment of MK 8:38 — 9:1 to MK 8:34-37. Shall it be said that the great length of the last Beatitude in document G, its future tense while the other Beatitudes are of the present, its use by the evangelist Matthew, although he already had its equivalent in the last Beatitude of docu- ment M, all are the results of the actual history of the early com- munity ? Did the desire to find, in the words of Jesus, comfort under drastic persecution lead to the repetition of those words under forms closely adapted to the experiences actually being undergone ? And when the words came to take hterary form, did they retain these adap- tations ? 52 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE 8. Document P contains a considerable body of sayings of Jesus about the future which the evangehst Matthew has distributed between two discourses, that on the mission of the disciples, Matt., chap. lo, and that on the future in general, :Matt., chaps. 24, 25. Since the former discourse receives from Matthew a wholly forward cast, there is no resultant modification of the thought of Jesus in Matthew's taking-over of the P paragraphs. But it is a question, to be decided by subsequent study, what was the actual occasion of the speaking of these portions of document P by Jesus, P §§6, 20, 22, 27-32, 44B. The absence of contextual relations in many parts of P, and the ap- parently artificial junctions at some other places, suggest, if they do not demand, some attempt at a redistribution of these sayings. 9. The convergence of several independent results of documentary comparison upon document MK at MK 9:36-50 suggests that the difficulties to interpretation which that portion of document MK presents are the outcome of a certain confusion there of material which properly belongs to other periods in the career of Jesus. §6. Gospel compared with Document Document :M was used by Matthew only; our knowledge of its limits and form are derivable only from a study of that gospel. It is not possible, therefore, to determine the degree of Matthew's faithful- ness in transcription from document :M by comparative study. Docu- ment G was used by both Matthew and Luke, the former omitting some parts of it. A close study of what both have drawn from document G will satisfy one that the paralleled material is substantially the same in content, that is, both were faithful to their source. Luke used document P as a whole; Matthew used it in part and by distribution. How determine which, if either, was more faithful to his P source ? If they differ, there is no external standard to which appeal may be made. Judgment as to which is the more authentic form of any saying taken by both from document P must rest, it would seem, largely on internal evidence, except as such evidence may be corrigible by some discoverable tendency in one or the other evangelist. It may not be asserted in advance which evangehst will have the say- ing in its more nearly original form. Thus : THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 53 Matthaean P Lukan P But if I by the Spirit of God cast out devils, But if I by the finger of God cast out devils, then is the kingdom of God come upon you. then is the kindgom of God come upon you. Matthafan P Lukan P If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts If ye then, being evil, know how to give good unto your children, how much more shall your gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them them that ask him ? that ask him ? Here the same tendency has been at work, now in the one gospel, now in the other. It is the hke tendency which in document MK repre- sents John the Baptist as defining the work of the Christ in terms of a baptism "with the Holy Spirit." In the case of the use of document MK by the two later evangelists, there is an entirely different situation, for we have the document itself as well as the derivative gospels. It is possible to test the faithful- ness of Matthew and Luke here with more thoroughness, and almost wholly by an objective standard. In the comparison of document with document in the preceding § 5 there was brought under review every passage which the documents have in common. Obviously it is neither practicable nor desirable to attempt the same in a comparison of gospel with document. It is proposed to study those passages only which contain teaching of Jesus on the future, the theme of the present work. The object of this com- parison of gospel with document is the determination of the most authentic attainable form of the sayings of Jesus about the future, if it should prove that gospel departs from document in any particulars. The common faithfulness, in all substantial details, of Matthew and Luke to document G has been affirmed. Though passages have been cited to show differences in the two reports of the document P sayings, it will be evident to one who will make the examination that, for the most part, the divergences of Matthew and Luke in their docu- ment P portions are of a minor character, except, of course, in the entirely different setting given them by Matthew. Similarly, if one will go carefully through all portions of the gospels derived from document MK, the dominant impression brought away from such a study will be, it seems safe to predict, a conviction of the essential faithfulness of the evangelists to their document MK. Of the two, it will be found that Matthew stands closer in verbal likeness, on the whole, to our present MK than does Luke. This suggests that 54 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE either Luke transcribed from his document MK with greater freedom than did Matthew, or Matthew used a copy of document MK more nearly like the copy which has come down to us than that to which Luke had access. No critical assumption would be less warranted than that document MK remained static through the period of gospel formation. Much more probable is it that document MK was in a more or less fluid state in the years within which the production of the gospels of Matthew and Luke belongs. The preface of Luke testifies to the state of gospel tradition at the time when he undertook his editorial task. We do not know where either Matthew or Luke were produced, nor the length of time that separated the work of the first and third evangeHsts. Neither can we say with assurance which of the two was brought forth first. Certain internal bases of judgment there are, but these are hardly of a nature to constitute a convincing and final argument. There is need, therefore, constantly to hold in mind that in hand- ling our present Gospel of ]\Iark we are not dealing with a document which is in ever>' verbal detail precisely the document MK used by Matthew and Luke, or by either one of them. That would be to presuppose an attitude toward gospel material in the age of Matthew and Luke which is not only unsupported by available testimony but is in opposition to all ascertainable facts for a period decades after Matthew and Luke.' That which has been said about the docu- ment MK in its relation to the present Gospel of IMark and to the gos- pels of Matthew and Luke holds, with certain modifications, in the case of document P. We know nothing of the history of document P from external sources, and can be sure only that it was current in an age when the gospel tradition was in the process of growth and adapta- tion. It would be highly arbitrary to assume that ever}^ diver- gence between the Matthaean and the Lukan report on the form of the sayings taken from document P is the result of editorial work by one or the other of the evangeHsts. Quite as likely is it that docu- ment P underwent changes during its history, and that it came to each evangelist with different divergences from the common document which formed the original of the two copies used by the evangeHsts. ' See Hobson, The Diatessaron of Tatian and the Synoptic Problem, Chicago, 1904. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 55 In the determination of the original form of a saying from document P which is differently reported by the evangeUsts, while the appeal must be mainly to internal evidence, the judgment so based ought to have grounds other than in the single passage under examination. If one were to raise the question theoretically, in advance of any examination of the facts, as to what class in the sayings of Jesus was most hkely to undergo change and modification in the course of trans- mission, it can hardly be doubted what the answer would be. Those sayings of Jesus which dealt with the future, especially the future bounded by the hfetime of his hearers, would be less hkely to retain the form given them by Jesus than sayings which had to do with other general or particular moral or religious problems. This may be stated another way by affirming that, where Jesus formulated pro- phetic forecasts dealing with the near future, his words in transmis- sion would be subjected to two strongly modifying influences, the active hopes and longings of his disciples, and the course of history as it actually did develop. That these influences did modify may not be asserted in advance; that they would be likely to modify must be recognized. To suppose modification is not to assume that it must be foredetermined and conscious. Changes in the form of sayings, even very considerable changes, are not always the product of inten- tional, purposeful modification. /. The MaUhaean P compared with the Lukan P I. The Faithful and Wise Steward or Servant Lukan P §29 Matthaean P a Who, then is the faithful and wise steward, A Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his lord shall set over his household, to give whom liis lord hath set over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season ? Blessed them thtir food in due season? Blessed is that is that servant, whom his lord when he Cometh servant, whom his lord when lie cometh shall find shall find so doing. Of a truth I say unto you, that so doini;. Verily I say unto you, that he will set he will set him over all that he hath. But if that him over all that he hath. But if that evil servant servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth shall say in his heart. My lord tarrieth; and shall his coming; and shall begin to beat the men- begin to beat his fellow-servants, and shall eat and servants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; the lord of that servant drink, and to be drunken; the lord of that servant shall come in a day when he e.tpecteth not. and in shall come in a day when he e.xpectcth not, and an hour when he knoweth not, and shall cut him in an hour when he knoweth not. and shall cut asunder, and appoint his portion with the him asunder, and appoint his portion with the unfaithful. B hypo- crites: there shall be the weeping and gna.shing of teeth. Whence the addition found in the Matthaean version, portion B, of the parable ? Is it a natural part of the parable ? Was the servant hypocritical, or merely unfaithful ? Could any man consign another 56 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE to the fate implied in the Matthaean addition, portion B ? Does that addition arise from the fact that for "the lord" of the parable there had been substituted the Lord of heaven in the mind of the transcriber, and that his thought was fixed upon the return of that Lord rather than upon an accurate transcription of the parable ? By this Matthaean addition the parable becomes strictly eschatological in appHcation. It will be recalled that already two parables have been found in the Gospel of jMatthew which show eschatological additions when com- pared with the same parables as reported in document P. These parables, the Talents and the Marriage Feast, II:C:i, 2 of §4 above, are from document M. The Gospel of Matthew seems, therefore, to have eschatological additions to parables both when those parables come from M and when from P. 2. The Antithesis to the Kingdom of God LuKAN P §40 Matthaean P There shall be the weeping and gnashing of And I say unto you, that many shall come from, teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abra- Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, ham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of and yourselves cast forth without. And they shall heaven: but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast come from the east and west, and from the north forth into the outer darkness: there shall be the and south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of weeping and gnashing of teeth. God. What human feeHng is expressed by "the weeping and gnashing of teeth" in the Lukan P ? Envious anger, is it not ? What feeling by the Matthaean P ? Physical anguish, is it not ? Does not this difference change the thought essentially? The antithesis to "the kingdom of God" in the Lukan P is simply "without;" in the Mat- thaean version it is "the outer darkness: there shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth." In other words, the phrase "the weeping and gnashing of teeth" is brought by Matthew into an eschatological service. In the Lukan P it seems to mean no more than it does in Acts 7 : 54. Outside of the Lukan P §40, this phrase occurs only in the Gospel of Matthew, where it appears six times. One of these is the above; another is that in the parable of the Faithful and Wise Steward just considered, I:i above; two more are in the additions to the parables of the Talents and Marriage Feast, § 4:II:C:i, 2; the remaining two are in the conclusions to the expositions of the parables in docu- ment M §§i6, 18. Stated by documents, it occurs four times in M, M §§15, 18, 23, 25, and twice in the Matthaean version of document THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 57 P, always in an eschatological sense. Its only use as a non-eschatologi- cal term is in its single appearance outside of the Gospel of Matthew, Lukan P §40. How account for these phenomena ? By assuming that the four were in document M as it came to Matthew, and that he changed P under the influence of M ? By the theory that all were derived by Matthew from the single non-eschatological instance in P ? By assuming that they were neither in M nor were added by the evangelist Matthew, but were added by subsequent editors of the Gospel of Matthew ? A decision is inadvisable without a wider basis for deduction. That which is certain is that the Gospel of Matthew presents at these points eschatological features which are not supported by the other witnesses to the sayings of Jesus. 3. The Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit Lukan P§2i Matthaean P A And every one who shall speak a word against A And whosoever shall speak a word against the the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoso- unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy ever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not Spirit it shall not be forgiven. be forgiven him, B neither in this world, nor in that which is to come. Is the Matthaean addition in this case one more instance of the tendency in the Gospel of Matthew to give sayings of Jesus an eschato- logical cast ? Wliy this reference in portion B to the two aeons, unless the writer is moved by certain preconceptions about hfe in two time periods ? What place did this idea have in that Jewish thought con- temporary with the production of the Gospel of Matthew ? Is its presence here to be accounted for by its currency in certain circles of Christian thought which were under the dominance of Jewish expec- tations ? Whatever the decision as to its origin, certain it is that it adds something to the thought of Jesus as originally expressed.' 4. The Nature of the Sign of Jonah Lukan P§ 16 Matthaean P A And when the multitudes were gathering to- A But he an.>' closely; the phrase "all the region round about Jordan," it has been observed, was probably derived from document G, Matthew having taken it up at another point. Matt. 3:5. The idea of "repentance" Alatthew gives in the form of an exhortation, " Repent ye." To what his source gives him he adds, however, his own conception of the basis of John's appeal, "for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." That John used these words is nowhere recorded by either document MK or G. Both documents make it clear that John announced the coming of another after him; and though document MK, as has been seen, credits John with a very different expectation as to the work of the Coming One from that reported in document G, it is evident that both documents intend to represent John as asserting that his successor is to be the Messiah himself. It is clear from document G that John announced an impending crisis of the most transforming kind, G §iB-E, a crisis 86 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE to be wrought by the Messiah. The single question is whether John ever spoke of that crisis in the terms of Matthew, " the kingdom of heaven is at hand." From the known expressions used to designate the messianic era in the time of John, is it to be affirmed that this one of Matthew was probably one of those used by John? Can it be proven that the messianic age was known to the contemporaries of John under the phrase, ''the kingdom of God" ? Or was it Jesus who gave currency and content to that pregnant term ? The answers to these fundamental questions may not be assumed; they must rest on evidence of a convincing kind. With reference to the particular passage now under examination, its absence from his source at this point suggests that Matthew drew his summary from another place in document MK (1:15), where the words are attributed to Jesus. In rewriting that portion of his document MK, Matthew presented it in the precise words which he here attributes to John, Matt. 4:17 = Matt. 3:2. It seems difl&cult to doubt that Matthew acted under the conviction that both Jesus and John alike made prediction of a " king- dom of heaven" which was imminent, "at hand," and also under the conviction that in crediting this phrase to John he was not going beyond a general fact established for him by his documents. It was beyond the power of any man in the days of Matthew to discriminate accurately between phrases which had attained general currency only after John, and those that were popular modes of conveying a certain body of ideas in the time of John. But for those who would know the mind of Jesus, it is of the utmost importance to make the distinction with sharpness. It m^ay not be concluded when the saying " the kingdom of heaven is at hand," as here attributed to John, has been traced to the similar saying in document MK 1:15, where it is credited to Jesus, that we have certainly reached the point of origin for the saying. Considera- tions elsewhere advanced' seem strongly to favor the conclusion that the document G representation of the opening method and message of Jesus is more accurate; and that these words in document MK i : 15 are an evangelistic summary of the total message of Jesus in his ministry, a summary not derivable from anything said by Jesus in the earher periods of his activity, even on the testimony of document MK itself. I See pp. 301-6. i THE SOURCES AND TPIEIR HISTORY 87 Therefore the saying, "the kingdom of heaven is at hand," if it is to be credited even to Jesus himself, must be assigned to some period in his life other than that in which he was introducing himself and his mission to his people. This much seems demanded by the docu- mentary evidence, not to mention the indications everywhere in the gospels of the care of Jesus about any premature interpretations of himself and his vocation. Such interpretations of Jesus would have been the immediate consequence of such a saying as that in document MK 1:15, if that saying were taken in the sense intended by docu- ment MK and by Matthew when he attributes it to John. It seems very difficult to avoid the conclusion that the placing of the saying in document MK at i : 15 and its double use by Matthew when he took up that document. Matt. 3 : 2 and 4:17, are both the resuh of an expec- tation and a hope, by the authors of the document and the gospel, that the kingdom of God was speedily to come in the form of an eschatolo- gical blessing. Whether Jesus, by some other portions of his teaching, gave to his disciples the firm grounds for such far-reaching expectations, and thus the justification for so summarizing his teaching and for so characterizing the message of John, is a subject for subsequent investi- gation. It suffices at present to draw attention to the fact that a say- ing attributed to John by Matthew was not found by him at that point in his document, and that at the place from which he drew it the docu- ment MK itself comes into conflict with the valuable document G, and with the most probable course of the history as discoverable from a study of the whole method of Jesus in establishing in his con- temporaries the conviction of his vocation as the Messiah. In brief, an eschatological tendency seems to have been active both in gospel MT and in document MK. 6. The Age of Torment Gospel MT 8:29 Document MK 5:6, 7 Gospel LK 8:28 And behold, they cried out, say- And when he saw Jesus from And when he saw Jesus, he ing, What have we to do with thee, afar, he ran and worshipped him; cried out, and fell down before thou Son of God ? art thou come and crying out with a loud voice, him, and with a loud voice said, hither to torment us before the he saith. What have 1 to do with What have I to do with thee' time? thee, Jesus, thou Son of the Most Jesus, thou Son of the Most High High God ? I adjure thee by God, God ? I beseech thee, torment me torment me not. not. In the above passage we are not dealing with words of Jesus, but with those attributed to a demon. The object of bringing them under review is to exhibit the fact that not alone the words of Jesus and of 88 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE John were subjected to an eschatological influence in the hands of Matthew, but also those of other speakers in the gospels. To the report of his document MK, faithfully followed by Luke, Matthew adds the significant words, "before the time," thus introducing the conception of an aeon in which torment is to be the portion of the evil. This conception has already been seen actively at work in many places in Matthew, especially in the conclusion to certain parables, the close to the Sermon on the Mount as in document M, and in the same document at the Jast words of the discourse against the scribes and Pharisees. Did these strong eschatological features in document M influence the evangelist Matthew so powerfully that the effect is to be found wherever there is an opportunity to give an eschatological turn to any part of the record ? Or does the editor Matthew himself belong to a circle in which these ideas are so thorouglily commonplace that the modifications he makes are largely done unconsciously? And if the latter, did he modify document M even as he has the other documents. Or did he derive docu- ment M from that circle to which he himself belonged, and had that circle modified the works of Jesus in transmission before they took documentary form? Does the fact that IMatthew alone among the evangelists had document M indicate that it circulated in a narrower circle than other documents about Jesus, and did this circle give it its peculiar characteristics, its emphasis upon eschatology, and its treasuring of words from Jesus about the eternal vaHdity of the law^ M§§3, 27? 7. The Extent of the Mission Gospel MT 15 : 24 Document MK 7 : 27 But he answered and said, I was not sent but And he said unto her, Let the children first be unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. filled. In the words of document MK, Jesus neither explicitly affirms nor denies that there is to be a mission to others than "the children." But there is apparently implicit in his use of "first" the suggestion that after "the children" others may have consideration. \Vlien the others are to receive attention, whether from himself or from his disciples, is not stated nor hinted by him in this saying as recorded in document MK. But in the Matthaean rewriting of these words, that which Jesus has conveyed only by suggestion and indirectly is subjected to explicit interpretation. The thought is Hmitcd to the THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 89 activity of Jesus himself; the modifying element in "first" is lost from sight; there is one worker and one iield and one time, "I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." The saying of Jesus in document MK may be correctly restated in gospel MT; but that there is no other possible meaning to the MK words will hardly be maintained. Even in the light of the actual hmits of the pubhc activity of Jesus, it is far from evident, it would seem, that he intended to define those limits by this particular saying. That seems to have been too simply assumed by Matthew in taking over this portion of his document. This easy conclusion by Matthew raises the question whether, like many modifications of the sayings of Jesus, it flowed naturally from some fixed and deep preconception which was held and was active almost, if not wholly, without the consciousness of the evangelist. What was Matthew's thought as to the extent of the mission of Jesus, on the one hand, and of the disciples after him, on the other ? Did Matthew conceive of one or of both as limited to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel"? Was it the Matthaean thought that Jesus himself made a personal decision to confine his activity to Israel, but that he defined the mission of his disciples in larger terms, assigned to them the task which followed upon that "first" to which he mainly devoted his energies? The answers to these important questions may be had by a study of that discourse on the mission of the disciples which Matthew has brought together in his section. Matt. 9 : 35—10 : 42. It has been seen that, under the influence of the large body of material for that discourse which Matthew drew from documents P and MK, he gave to the whole discourse a future outlook, even to the point of omitting the assertions that the Twelve went out at the time, MK 6:12, 13, and returned later, MK 6:30, 31. Notwith- standing this influence, reasonable conformity to his documents gave to the first part of the discourse the impression of a mission carried out in the lifetime of Jesus, Matt. 9: 35— 10: 16. That portion of the discourse may be constructed in its Matthaean order by the editorial use of documentary material as follows: MK §30 + MK §330 + P §4+ MK§3iA + MK§i7. It will be found on examination that every thought in these several sections is taken up and wrought into an orga- nized and consistent unit in the Matthaean paragraph. The editorial 90 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE task of combination has been done with fidehty and skill. But in the midst of this conflated section there stand two verses not accounted for by the documents P and MK, Matt. 10:5, 6. Whence were they derived by the evangehst ? They are a definition of the extent of the mission not derivable from any saying of Jesus at any point in docu- ments G, P, or MK. Shall the problem be solved by assigning them to the document M?' Then that document must have contained a discourse on the mission which could contribute to this portion of Matthew's discourse this saying only. Which is the more reasonable, to assign this isolated saying to document M, or to regard it as the editorial addition of Matthew, an addition wrought under the same conception as that which is seen at work in the above rewriting of MK 7 : 27 as Matt. 15 : 24 ? If the latter, then Matthew regarded the mis- sion of the disciples, in the lifetime of Jesus at the least, as limited to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel," even as was the mission of Jesus himself according to the Matthaean interpretation of document MK 7:27. When Matthew moves forward in the construction of this discourse to the use of those portions of his documents MK and P which clearly deal with a mission after the departure of Jesus, Matt. 10: 17-42, he begins by employing successively MK 13 : 9-13 + G § 14B -1- P § 20, But in the midst of this material there occurs a verse which is not derivable from any of these documents either at these or at any other points. Matt. 10:23, "But when they persecute you in this city, flee into the next: for verily I say unto you. Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come." Here again is a definition of the limits of the mission, in this case clearly apphcable only to that mission which should be prosecuted after the death of Jesus. From whence did Matthew derive this saying? Shall the resort be made to document M ?' Then it must be affirmed that document M is peculiarly supplementary, namely, only in definitions of the scope of the mission. Is it more reasonable to believe that this verse is from Matthew himself, the chronological element in it being based upon such a saying as that in document MK 9:1? It has been seen that, in taking over MK9:i from his document, Matthew rewrote it, ' Such is the assignment made by Professor Burton in his monograph on the Synoptic Problem. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 9^ Matt. 16:28, in terms precisely corresponding to those which he employs in the verse now under consideration, Matt. 10: 23. It seems highly probable, therefore, that the chronological phase of the present verse is none other than what Matthew regarded as a reasonable and, indeed, inevitable use of a promise of Jesus calculated to sustain his disciples under persecution. This corresponds precisely to the use made of it by document MK at 9: i, where the reference to persecu- tion in preceding sayings is much less certain than it is in the para- graph from document MK with which Matthew here precedes this promise. The actual experiences brought by developing history seem to have determined the setting given by the framers of document MK, and to have led Matthew to use again the same thought at the present point in his construction of the discourse on the mission. At both points the saying strongly serves the contemporary purpose of encouraging under persecution. Whether the original form of the saying as in document MK, in its original setting, which is not now known, was intended to serve this purpose is a question answerable only after a more complete knowledge of the thought of Jesus about the future of the kingdom of God than is obtainable from this saying interpreted by itself. From the evidence of these passages in Matthew, it seems that the Matthaean conception of the mission was that, for Jesus himself, for his disciples during his lifetime, for those disciples after his death, there was one field and one field only— "the lost of sheep of the house of Israel," "distressed and scattered as sheep not having a shepherd," " through the cities of Israel." If the mind is better satisfied by tra- cing these sayings to the document M,' then it is to be affirmed that the document M, besides showing a strong eschatological tendency, and a fondness for those sayings of Jesus which asserted the eternal validity of the Law, held a conception of the extent of the mission of Jesus and his disciples that is not supported at any point by any of the other documents, a conception likely to belong to those who were dominated by an eschatological hope and a high estimate of the Law. Against the supposition that the sayings are from the evangelist, and not from his document M, there may not be urged such passages as Matt. 21:43, which looks beyond "the house of Israel." For this I See note on preceding page. 92 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE was not in document MK to influence the thought of ]\latthew, and as an editorial addition is quite as hkely to be subsequent to Matthew as from him. Indeed, the evidence of the passages just examined seems to necessitate the conclusion that Matt. 21:43 is from a later hand, unless it also be attributed to document M, and that document be supposed to have held wholly isolated sayings of a contradictor}^ content, sayings which Matthew in turn incorporated without editorial insight. Against the supposition of such a procedure, there is the strong testimony to the possession of penetration and skill which appears abundantly elsewhere in the editorial product of the evangeHst.'' 8. Reasons for the Loss of Life Gospel MT 16:25 Document MK 8:35 Gospel LK 9:24 For whosoever would save his For whosoever would save his For whosoever would save his life shall lose it: and whosoever life shall lose it; and whosoever life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall shall lose his life for my sake and shall lose his life for my sake, the find it. the gospel's shall save it. same shall save it. Document MK contains the phrase " and the gospel's" which is not present in either Matthew or Luke. There seems to be no reason why they should have omitted it, if it were present in the copies used by them; there are many very strong reasons why in that case it should have been retained by them. This whole paragraph in docu- ment MK, MK 8:34— 9: 1, was apparently interpreted as referring to the persecutions under the mission, and the phrase " and the gospel's" was intended as applicable to that mission. Why did Matthew and Luke omit it, if present ? The obvious inference is that it was not in the original MK, but is an addition by a later hand. As such, it is another indication that "life" in this paragraph of document MK was interpreted as referring solely to the body, and that the loss of life was taken to mean its death under persecution in the prosecution of the mission. To this interpretation there has been attributed already the attachment of the two sayings of Jesus in MK 8:38; 9:1. The evidences seem to accumulate that the mission as actually wrought out had a reflex influence upon those sayings of Jesus which lent themselves, in a lesser or greater degree, to being interpreted as though intended by him to refer to the mission. I Other sayings in the documents, in definition of the extent of the mission, are examined on pp. 342-52. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 93 9. The Rewards of Discipleship Gospel MT 19:27-20 A Then answered Peter and said unto him, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee; B what then shall we have? C And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, D that ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. E And every one that hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive a hundredfold. G and shall inherit eternal life. Document MK 10:28-30 A Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee. Gospel LK 18:28-30 A And Peter said, Lo, we have left our own, and followed thee. C Jesus said, V'erily C And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, 1 say unto you. E There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel's sake, but he shall receive a hundredfold now in this time, F houses, and breth- ren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, G with per- secutions; and in the world to come eternal life. E There is no man that hath left house, or wife, or brethren, or parents, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, who shall not receive manifold more in this time. G and in the world to come eternal life. In the portion E, document MK has "for my sake and for the gospel's sake;" gospel LK has "for the kingdom of God's sake;" gospel MT has "for my name's sake." The simplest explanation of these differences seems so be the supposition that the original docu- ment MK read here, as in MK 8:35, "for my sake." This Matthew rewrote as "for my name's sake," and Luke as "for the kingdom of God's sake." Subsequently there was added to document MK the phrase "and for the gospel's sake," as also, on less doubtful evi- dence, in MK 8:35. The tendency to interpret these sayings about renunciation as stating conditions of participation in the mission seems to be exhibited again in this paragraph by the addition in portion G of the words "with persecutions." Neither Matthew nor Luke give any evidence that these words stood in their document MK; they seem to be the product of the experiences of the early community. This supposition does not assume that Jesus did not both foresee and forecast persecutions for his followers, for there is abundant documen- tary evidence that he did, for example, document P § 20 and document MK 13:9-13. The surmise is simply that what Jesus predicted led, when it was realized, to the unconscious modification of portions of other sayings of Jesus which were not intended by him to refer to this particular subject. The dropping of the repetitious portion F by 94 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE both Matthew and Luke is in accordance with their Hterary treat- ment of the graphic but non-essential elements in their document MK. The Matthaean addition in portion B is natural as a definite introductory question to precede the specific reply of Jesus which Matthew alone records in portion D. The differences already noted are significant in themselves, but trivial compared with that which is estabhshed between Matthew and his source MK by the presence of portion D. From whence has that saying come? The words of Jesus as recorded in document MK define the rewards of discipleship in terms which are appHcable to all disciples in all ages. The rewards in portion D are limited to twelve men. Had the rich young ruler, who occasioned these sayings, renounced his wealth, as suggested by Jesus, he would have had no part in certain special privileges which could not extend beyond a circle equal in number to the tribes of Israel. Prerogatives of the first order belong to the first Twelve, but not to later apostles hke Paul, it would seem. For all others who fulfil these conditions of discipleship there is the reward of "a. hundredfold now" and "eternal life." The twelve are exalted to the very highest plane of recogni- tion and notable privilege. Is this what Jesus told the Twelve at other points in his career when they were disputing as to place in the future kingdom which they confidently expected was not far from reahzation ? Did Jesus regard the assignment of place as within his power, or did he assert that these things were determined by Another ? Whenever self-seeking or self-advancement was manifest in his disciples, on whatever basis, what was the attitude of Jesus toward it, apart from the present passage D ? Did Jesus take the occasions of the ambitious questions of his disciples as opportunities to depict their future glory, or is the testimony of the documents to the effect that he turned these occasions into times for defining most clearly and searchingly his own conception of the true road to great- ness? This portion D, which is unsupported by document MK, is vividly and unhesitatingly eschatological. And it belongs to the Gospel of Matthew. What has been found true of such portions in preceding examinations ? Shall it be held that Matthew drew this saying from document M ? Then that document had eschatology everywhere THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 95 in its structure, and wherever it can be tested by comparison with another document it is peculiar to M. If the saying was preserved in M, the circle which handed down M apparently gave an eschato- logical trend to the words of Jesus at very many places, treasured his sayings on the eternal validity of the Law, defined the mission of Jesus and of his disciples after him as for Israel only, and had the con- viction that in the day of Last Things the tribes of Israel would be judged by those who were the first disciples of the Messiah. This is a consistent and unified body of ideas; but can it be affirmed with confidence whether they are those of Jesus, or those of document M, or those of the evangelist Matthew, or those of editorial workers upon the Gospel of Matthew ? That these ideas, at least in the passages already examined, are not from Jesus, except that on the Law in part, seems to be established by the comparative study of documents. That not all of them are to be attributed to document M is supported by the appearance of some of them as isolated sayings in narratives which could hardly be transmitted in parts only. That Matthew did himself rewrite certain sayings, of which we have a threefold record, in a form much more certainly eschatological than that given him by his document, has been put beyond doubt by examination. In view of these facts, perhaps one may hesitate to assert confidently, on the basis of portion D above, ^ that Jesus depicted the Son of man as sitting on a throne of glory in the regeneration, surrounded by the Twelve exercising judicial functions over the tribes of Israel. lo. The Two Aeons Gospel MT 22:30 Document MK 12:25 Gospel LK 20:34, 35 For in the resurrection they For when they shall rise from The sons of this world marry, neither marry, nor are given in the dead, thev neither marry, nor and are given in marriage: but marriage. are given in marriage. they that are accounted worthy to attain to that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage. By the Lukan modification of this document ]MK saying there is brought distinctly into view one of the contemporary conceptions, namely, that of the two aeons, the aeon of the present and the aeon that was to come. Associated with this contrast of the two aeons there was a body of ideas quite distinctly defined, which covered a theory of the future in its various aspects. It is of importance to I For an examination of a somewhat similar saying in gospel LK, see pp. 221-25. 96 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE determine whether, either by choice of phraseology or by explicit statement, Jesus showed himself in sympathy with this world- view and its important impHcations. It has certainly taken a very firm hold in this portion of the Gospel of Luke. That it was not derivable from document MK at this point is evidenced by the document itself and by its Matthaean use. Whether, however, the idea of the two aeons is so truly a part of the mode of thought of Jesus that there is here nothing more than a transfer of it to one additional place must be the subject of subsequent investigation. That the evangehst Luke believed that Jesus thought and spoke in terms of the two aeons seems clear from his treatment of this saying. In that particular, his judgment may or may not have accorded with the facts. ^ §7. Results of Comparison of Gospel with Document Not all of those passages in which gospel shows departure from document, in reporting teaching of Jesus on the future, have been brought under review on the preceding pages. But there have been considered enough instances to exhibit certain apparent tendencies in gospels and documents. Those passages not yet considered will appear, at one point or another, in the subsequent topical treatment of the several themes which make up the teaching of Jesus on the future. Before passing to these themes, there may profitably be brought together, in a summary way, some conclusions which seem to follow from the comparison of gospels with documents. 1. In general, the comparison of the Matthaean P with the Lukan P results in the estabhshment of the fact that the Matthaean P has been frequently modified; and that this modification takes the direc- tion, either of conforming sayings to histor\^ as wrought out before the tradition took literary fixedness, or of giving to sayings an eschato- logical cast. This eschatological tendency can be detected in the Lukan P occasionally, but much less often than in the Matthaean. 2. Additional study tends to confirm the conclusion stated under paragraph 3 in the summary of §5, namely, that no final and deter- minative worth may be attached to the order of narratives and setting of sayings in the document P. 3. The eschatological trend which was found, in the compari- I See pp. 250-56. THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 97 son of document with document, as a marked characteristic of the document M, is seen further not only, as stated above, in the Mat- thaean P as compared with the Lukan, but also in gospel MT when placed beside document MK. An exhibit of those instances in which eschatological emphases iind a place in the Gospel of Matthew, but are unsupported by the test of comparative study, stands thus: A. Eschatological conclusions to parables — §4 : II : C : i , 2 ; §6 : 1 : i . B. Eschatological close to discourses — §4:1:6:3; II:C:4. C. TheTwo Aeons— §6:1:3, 10. D. The "soul" in Gehenna — §6:1:6. E. TheDayof Judgment— §6:1:7, 8; II:i, 2, 9; §4:1:6:3. F. The Coming {irapovaia) of the Son of man — §6:1: 13, 9. G. The Son of Man as Judge of Men— §6:11: i. H. The Kingdom of the Son of Man— §6:11:2, 5. I. The Age of Torment— §6:11:6; 1:2. J. Judicial Functions of the Twelve — §6:11:9- By an examination of these various phases of the eschatological idea as it comes into evidence in the Gospel of Matthew, in all cases at places where the documentary parallel is against the Matthaean reading, it will be made clear that substantially every phase of the eschatological notion has found representation at one point or another, some phases having repeated appearances. Taken in their entirety, these passages form perhaps the most striking and peculiar character- istic of the Gospel of Matthew. 4. Of passages in the Gospel of Matthew modified by the develop- ments of history after the words were spoken by Jesus there may be mentioned those affected by: A. The Influence of the Resurrection — §6:1:4. B. TheEfltectsof the Roman War— §4:II:C:2; §6:1:5- C. The Mission of the Disciples— §6:1:9. D. The Rise of False Prophets— §4:1:6:3. 5. From passages brought under examination in several of the above comparative studies, it seems to be estabHshed that the Gospel of Matthew, in these passages, defines the mission of Jesus himself, the mission of his disciples in his hfetime, and their mission after the death of Jesus as limited, by the choice and instructions of Jesus, to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" — §6:11:7. 6. Within the Gospel of Matthew, and in large measure peculiar 98 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE lo it, in passages examined to the present, there stand several cognate ideas, namely, the emphasis upon eschatology in all its phases, the high valuation of the Law, the limitation of the mission to the Jews, the exaltation of the Twelve as judges of the tribes of Israel "in the regeneration," ideas which seem to indicate that the ]Matthaean tradi- tion had a special relation to a certain class in the early Christian community. 7. The study of all the instances of its appearance in the Synoptic Gospels seems to put beyond doubt the assertion that "coming (jrapovaiay is not one of the terms employed by Jesus himself in any connection — §6:1:13. 8. The notion of the Two Aeons appears, unsupported by docu- ment jMK, not only in gospel MT but also in gospel LK — §6 : II : 10. 9. There are a few marked instances of eschatological trend in the passages examined in the Gospel of Luke by comparison. These occur both in document P and where Luke is using document MK — §6:I:ii, 12; 11:3,10. 10. Certain sayings reported in document MK are shown, by their setting and the interpretation evidently given them by the makers of the document MK tradition, to have been regarded as eschatological in content, and dependent for their contextual value upon that con- tent, MK 8:38 — 9:1. One of these, MK 8:38, in its most original form, §6:1: 1, seems to be lacking in any eschatological element. Another, MK 9:1, cannot be taken as referring to the Last Things until it is estabHshed that this is what Jesus means when he speaks of the future of the kingdom, §6:11:2. One of the most significant sayings on the future in document MK, ]\IK 14:62, seems to carry an accretion, " and coming with the clouds of heaven," which is unsup- ported by comparative study, § 6 : II : 4. The document MK summary of the Galilean message of Jesus, MK 1:15, bears an eschatological hint which has no warrant in the detailed records of his words in the early period of his ministry, and is opposed to his opening method and message as recorded in the G document — §4:1: A: 2. 11. Not only did the mission of the disciples as \vrought out after the death of Jesus affect the structure of parts of Matthew; the influence of their experiences and needs are traceable in document MK — §6:1: 14; 11:8,9. No phase of the mission's life left its THE SOURCES AND THEIR HISTORY 99 impress so indelibly in the form of modified sayings as did the perse- cutions. This is notable both in the Lukan P and in document MK — §6:I:i2; II:i, 2, 9. Apparently there must be credited to these persecutions the exceptional length and the use by Matthew of the last Beatitude in the document G account of the Sermon on the Mount. 12. It was pointed out under paragraph 9 in the summary of the comparison of document with document in § 5 that several independent results of the study of documentary paralleHsm converged to estabhsh the belief that document MK 9 : 33-50 had become the depository of several unrelated sayings. By comparison of gospels with documents the same conclusion has been attained — §6:1: 14. These sayings, it would therefore seem, must be interpreted, as to both original form and meaning, in other contexts than that given them by MK 9 : 33-50. 13. The above-mentioned close study of MK 9:33-50, in its rela- tion to the Matthaean parallel, seems to evidence the fact that Mat- thew's eighteenth chapter is marked by additional indications of the same character, that is, consists of other sayings which have only a superficial relation to the subject in hand, to one another, and to their documentary originals. 14. In addition to the sayings of Jesus about the future which are named in paragraph 8 of § 5 as distributed from document P by Mat- thew in his two discourses on the future. Matt., chaps. 10 and 24, 25, there must now be set down P §60, one of the most important. But unlike most other sections of document P on the future, P §60 seems to bear some original relation to the discourse on the future in the thirteenth chapter of document MK, other than that suggested merely by the Matthaean distribution of P §60 in his record of that discourse -§4:III:C:22, 23; §6:1:13. 15. To summarize by documents: It must be said that document M , document MK, and document P in both its Matthaean and Lukan forms, all, in greater or in lesser degree, show modification of sayings of Jesus about the future, and traces of the influence of history as it developed, which may be detected and corrected by the comparison of document with document or of gospel with document. If the form and extent of the final Beatitude in document G§ioB be regarded as calling for explanation when it is compared with others in lOO THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE G and with its own parallel in document M § i end, document G also must be added. 1 6. That which was advanced at the opening of §6 as theoretically probable, namely, that sayings of Jesus about the future have been modified in transmission, as the result of preconceptions and of the actual experience of events after the departure of Jesus, seems to be established by investigation. It was suggested that no other class of sayings from Jesus was so likely to be affected as that which dealt, really or apparently, with what was to happen within the lifetime of his hearers. It is not within the province of the present work to exhibit the facts in detail about other sayings dealing with other themes; but the general assertion may be ventured that on few other themes in the teaching of Jesus will there be found, by the methods here employed, such numerous and notable modifications of the words of Jesus as are detectable in those which deal with the various aspects of the Future. CHAPTER II THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM § I. Absence of Political Background from the Gospels § 2. Political References and the Poverty of Their Content § 3, Evidences of the Interest of Jesus in the National Life § 4. Occasions and Forms of the Political Forecast made by Jesus § 5. Absence from the Records of an Adequate Basis for Jesus' Forecast § 6. An Exhibit of the Critical Events within the Lifetime of Jesus § 7. General Significance of These Events for Jesus § 8. Special Significance of the Rise of the Zealot Movement § 9. Attitude of Jesus toward the Zealot Movement §10. Pharisaism and Sadduceeism in Relation to the Zealot Movement §11. The Messianic Ideals of Jesus in Relation to Those of Zealotism CHAPTER II THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM §1. Absence of Political Background from the Gospels To the men who produced the Synoptic Gospels apparently it did not seem important to sketch the poUtical background. They were not influenced by a purpose to make the acts and words of Jesus more vivid and vital by a portrayal of the events and movements of his day. Luke, it is true, avows his purpose to trace '' the course of all things accurately from the first; "^ but we soon discover that he meant not much more than that he would do this for the events themselves, not for their origins, the external determinative influences, or their place in the larger movements of the contemporary Ufe. This historical sense of Luke does, indeed, lead him now and then to supply for his narrative certain brief settings which have a larger outlook; but these are chronological and have scant interpretative value. ^ So long as we are dependent upon Luke and his fellow Synoptists these are mere names and dates; only when outside sources yield the sub- stance do they become suggestive of throbbing and tumultuous life. For the authors of our three gospels it was enough that Jesus stand in contrast with Pharisees and scribes when he, by his acts or words, places himself there; they are satisfied with such an exhibit of the influence of these powerful leaders in Jewish life as is called forth by the simple record of Jesus' relations with them. When a Roman tetrarch or procurator is brought into direct relations with Jesus, he forms a part of the history; but it did not become a concern of the evangelist to set forth in an adequate way the trend of Roman rule in Palestine, and its far-reaching effect upon Jewish political and reli- gious fife, its effect upon the policy of Jesus himself, and upon many phases of the attitude of the leaders among his people toward Jesus. It satisfies the evangelist that he has recorded what Jesus has to say of his people's present position and of their future; he assumes a knowl- edge of those forces of the past which have made them what they are; he does not have an interest in sketching those political and religious xLukei:3. =» Luke 1:5; 2: i, 2; 3:1, 2. 103 I04 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE tendencies of the present which, to the mind of Jesus, contain a sure prophecy of the near future. §2. Political References and the Poverty of Their Content By Luke the promise of the birth of John the Baptist, by Matthew the time of the birth of Jesus the Christ, are set within the reign of Herod the king,' and Matthew tells of an act of Herod, growing out of the report of that birth, which gives such a shock to the sensi- bilities^ as to make the act seem incredible. But we are not told of that fierce lust for power and that consuming jealousy to which members of Herod's own family, and even his most passionately loved wife, fell a prey, of dark deeds beside w^hich the slaying of the infants seems to become, as it really is, a comparatively trivial incident in a mad career of crime. Luke tells of an "enrolment made when Quirinius was governor of Syria "^ with the simple purpose to show why a Nazarene went to Bethlehem; he does not record that the enrolment actually made under Quirinius was the occasion of a revolt by the Jews of a nature so serious that its effects lasted till Jerusalem was destroyed. Matthew records that at the visit of the Magi not only was Herod stirred to activity, but "all Jerusalem with him" was " troubled i""* he does not indicate that this "trouble" was based in the concern of the Jerusalem leaders to check indications of popular movements — a concern which later played a considerable part in determining the history of Jesus. Following this, Matthew shows the relation between the movements of the husband of Mary and the rule of Archelaus, and hints at an unfavorable attitude of this son of Herod ;5 but one would not therefrom infer for Archelaus a short ten years of high-handed and barbarous rule ending in banishment to Gaul, and leading to that radical change of form in the Roman administration of Judea which was to persist, with one brief intermission, till Titus took Jerusalem, and which had in it the seeds of fatal discord. Luke exhibits with fulness the distribution of power in Palestine at the time of the appear- ance of John the Baptist,^ but in such a way as suggests order and peace, and is not calculated to give knowledge of the frequently I Luke 1:5; Matt. 2:1. 4Matt. 2:3. ^Matt. 2:16. sMatt. 2:22. 3 Luke 2:1, 2. 6 Luke 3:1, 2. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 105 changed testaments of Herod the Great, the family quarrels, and the deputations to the Emperor which preceded this settlement. Mark knows of the imprisonment of John, and gives a reason for it;^ but the reason is grounded in morals, not poHtics; it fails to take account of the larger outlook that determines the poUcy of rulers: Now, when many others came to crowd about him, for they were greatly moved by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought it best by putting him to death to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into diffi- culties by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Machaerus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. ^ We are given a hint of a party called "the Herodians;"^ but are left to construct from facts gained outside the gospels some satisfactory theory of their probable views and influence. It is recorded that among the Twelve there was one "Simon, which was called the Zealot ;"•» there is no suggestion of those tenets of his sect which proved the most powerful factors in leading the people to that political attitude which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem. Decapolis is mentioned ;5 but not so as to distinguish it from the rest of Palestine in such a way as to make a war between the Jews of Perea and the people of Philadelphia natural and intelligible.^ Luke makes record of " Gahlaeans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices;"' the reason for this act, and the pohtical and historical significance of it, and consequently even its relation to the poHcy of Jesus, we are left to conjecture. Herod the tetrarch's reported attitude toward Jesus comes to us through the lips of Pharisees ;« here, because we have the reply of Jesus and are not dependent upon the historical sense of the evangeHst, illumination is shed. The record of one of the snare questions put to Jesus makes it evident that the issue of relations to Rome is a Hving one, a debatable one, at Jerusalem;^ but the vast chasm between opinions there, and the intensity of conviction that 1 Mark 6: 17, 18. ^ Antiquities, xx, i, §1. 2 Josephus, Antiquities, xviii, 5, §2. ' Luke 13:1. 3 Mark 3:6; 12:13. 8 Luke 13:31. 32- 4 Luke 6:15. 9 Mark 12: 13-17- s Mark 5 : 20. lo6 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE marked the adherents of the anti-Roman party is not even dimly suggested here or elsewhere. We are told of a Roman centurion at the cross of Jesus ;^ we have no hint of the Roman soldiers, so odious to the true Jews, who at that very hour were standing guard, fully armed and alert, in the temple porticoes, to suppress any riot which might occur, and whose presence there, at a later time, led to a tumult in which no fewer than twenty thousand perished.^ We can understand how any hint of sedition will awaken a ruler to action, and so are able to appreciate the poHcy of the Jerusalem leaders in giving to their charge against Jesus before Pilate the form they did ;3 but neither from the report of the trial nor elsewhere in the Synoptics do we get any adequate conception of the plague which the messianic hope of the Jews proved to be to their Roman rulers. And even wk&n direct and individual reference is made to " a notable prisoner," "lying bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder,"-* it does not call before the mind, as it ought for any true perspective, a long series of revolts, of lesser or greater magnitude, lying within the bounds of the life of Jesus. §3. Evidences of the Interest of Jesus in the National Life Any review of the political references in the Synoptic Gospels, and any just emphasis, by contrast, upon the poverty of their social, political, or historical content, will serve to make clear not only the indifference of the evangehsts to any large framework or setting of a vital kind, but also their unconcern for those general religious and political tendencies which surrounded Jesus. And in so far as their record of Jesus' words is regarded as fairly complete, or at least representative, this impression of unconcern for these tendencies passes over from the reporters to him who is reported. But against any such sweeping inference of indifference on Jesus' part to the trend of the movements of his day there stands the notable and highly significant fact that he gave expression, on several distinct occasions, to a definite religious and political forecast, which apparently he grounded in the conditions prevalent in his owti time. He saw that, ' Mark 15:39. 3 Luke 23:2, 5, 14. » Antiquities, xx, 5, §3. 4 Mark 15:7. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 107 for his people, history- was tending with slow but steady and sure movement toward the destruction of their capital city, and with it their corporate life; and this he announced with unmistakable clear- ness and great boldness. §4. Occasions and Forms of the Political Forecast made BY Jesus From the nature of the case, any reference by Jesus to a coming national catastrophe was calculated to awaken or intensify dislike for him, and hence to hasten the hour when the climax of hatred should be reached. For this reason, Jesus acted in this case as he did in several others of a like nature; he withheld full and explicit state- ment till the last days of his public activity, when the boldest and baldest utterance could add nothing to the activity of his opponents. Once only before his final entrance into Jerusalem was there drawn from him an expression of his conviction as to the national future. When it became evident to those who were watching his every move- ment that he had definitely set his face toward Jerusalem, and when, in addition, the ever-increasing multitude that was attaching itself to him seemed to indicate unmistakably an early, triumphant, and spectacular entrance into the city, the effort was made to dissuade him from that effort which they assumed he was making for the awakening of the popular messianic expectation. This was done by reminding him of the tragic fate of a recent uprising of like kind.^ Jesus used this politic warning, thrown out by the self-appointed guardians of the national peace, as the occasion for announcing that, short of a national regeneration, which should give another direction to the national ambitions and tendencies, it was certain that the nation as a whole would perish, and perish after the same drastic manner that marked the treatment of the Galilean insurgents by Pilate.' We are not helped by other sources to a precise knowledge of the event in connection with the tower of Siloam,^ but it may be conjec- tured that the eighteen men were in detention there for participation in some political uprising. Not having himself introduced the sub- ject of the national future as affected by present-day popular tend- encies, Jesus does not follow it beyond the instance cited to him, I Luke 13:1. =" Luke 13:2, 3. 3 Luke 13:4. 5. lo8 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE and another closely related to it. When he passes to a general statement,' he gives to his thought that form of expression which, because of its indefiniteness, will not immediately offend, but, because of its pictorial form, will remain in the memory to reveal its content at some future, more appropriate time. But to those among his hearers who were open-minded and far-visioned, the meaning of Jesus' parable was doubtless as clear as to those who now read it, after its prophecy has become history. When once Jesus had reached the last week of his life, he substi- tuted direct statement for parable, and vivid, detailed portrayal for general assertions. Thus, in connection with his approach to Jeru- 'salem, it is recorded of him that he said of the future of that city, If thou hadst known in this day, even thou, the things which belong unto peace ! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, when thine enemies shall cast up a bank about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall dash thee to the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another.^ A period of national upheaval and redistribution, if not destruc- tion, seems involved in the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen which Jesus addressed to the religious leaders.^ And this conjectural inter- pretation of the parable is justified further when one meets elsewhere, in the record of these last days, forms of statement the meaning of which is beyond doubt. For Jesus had on this subject, as on others of prime importance, deahngs with his disciples alone, as well as with the people at large. He closed the last day of his pubHc ministry by an impressive reference, in the presence of his disciples, to the future of the temple, the beauty and grandeur of which made an appeal even to the untrained aesthetic sense of his Galilean followers : And as he went forth out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings ! And Jesus said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings ? there shall not be left here one stone upon another, which shall not be thrown down.* This explicitness of statement was the occasion for a question from the disciples which led Jesus to his longest, most vivid and dramatic portrayal of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. ^ And even after > Luke 13:6-9. 3 Mark 12:9. 2 Luke 19:42-44. 4 Mark 13:1, 2. 5 Mark 13:14-20. For a critical examination of this paragraph, refer to chap, iv, §5- THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUS.\LEM 109 his public labors were ended, on the way to the cross when words from him were few, he spoke a message dictated by that phase of his people's future which loomed up with largeness of horror : Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say. Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the breasts that never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us. For if they do these things in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?^ §5. Absence from the Records of an Adequate Basis for Jesus' Forecast Over against these clear, specific, and reiterated utterances of* Jesus, by which his confident and steady conviction as to the future of Jerusalem is made evident, there stands, by contrast, the almost entire absence from the synoptic account of such historical indications of Jesus' time as must have formed the basis for such positive declara- tions. Not that the gospel records are wanting in reasons, morally and religiously grounded, why the sentence of condemnation must be the verdict upon the life of the nation; they make it abundantly evident that the Jewish people, by virtue of their present attitude toward the life and light in Jesus — not to go back into their past history or forward into their future — pass judgment upon themselves. The condemnation, then, is certain and is sufficiently justified. But what is the basis for the conjecture by Jesus, nay, the confident prophecy, that in these latter days condemnation, unlike that in many other generations, will find expression as retribution ? And in what tend- encies of the day lay the certainty that retribution would take the extreme form of the destruction of the capital city, even of the center of national religious fife ? For an answer to these questions, the ap- peal must be made to sources other than the gospels, to wTiters whose interest lay in the broader historical movements and outlook. §6. An Exhibit of the Critical Events within the Life- time OF Jesus It will suffice if the view be confined to those years within which Jesus himself hved. The critical events of those years by themselves, without the tracing of their roots in preceding time or their fruits in ' Luke 23:28-31. no THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE after years, will serve to base the general religious and political out- look of Jesus. Mere enumeration, without enlargement or extended comment, answers the present purpose . 1. Jesus was bom into the midst of poHtical ferment. The rumor that the sickness of Herod the Great had taken a fatal turn was the signal for an outburst of long-subdued protest and revolt. Incited by two rabbis of high repute, Judas and Matthias, a large body of the more ardently patriotic and religious among the younger men of the nation tore down the golden eagle erected by Herod, contrary to Jevsdsh law, over the great gate of the temple. This was part of a general plan "to defend the cause of God." As a result, Herod deprived the high-priest, Matthias, of his office because of his sup- posed sympathy with the movement; and burnt alive with his com- panions the other Matthias, who had raised the insurrection. Others who had been arrested he delivered to the proper officers to be put to death.' 2. Herod the Great got together the most illustrious men out of every village in all Judea into the hippodrome at Jericho. He left orders that they be slain immediately upon his death, that there might be mourning for him — a mourning to take the place of that spontaneous sorrow which hatred for him would prevent. Though the design was frustrated by Salome and her husband, it indicates the pohtical situation.^ Indeed, it is recorded that Herod even went so far as to command, for this same purpose, "that one out of every family should be slain. "^ 3. Upon the death of Herod, the demand was made of Archelaus, his successor in Judea, that Herod's punishment of the revolt under Judas and Matthias be recognized as wrong, especially by the deposi- tion of the high-priest whom Herod had appointed in the place of that Matthias whom he had suspected. The demand proceeded from a great multitude which had assembled at the time of the Passover. Archelaus sent his general with soldiers to exhort the crowd to quiet and order. The soldiers were assaulted and most of them stoned to death. Thereupon Archelaus dispatched his whole army against the I War, i, 33, §§2-4; Antiquities, xvii, 6, §§1-4. a War, i, 33, §§6, 8; Antiquities, xvii, 6, §5 and 8, §2. 3 Antiquities, xvii, 6, §6. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM m Passover multitudes inside and outside of the city. The cavalry of Archelaus slew three thousand men/ 4. Plots and counter-plots, arguments and answers to arguments were set forth before the Emperor at Rome as to the succession to the throne of Herod. Large emphasis was laid upon the ruthless conduct of Archelaus in slaying the thousands of Jews at the Passover.^ 5. Upon the departure of Archelaus for Rome, and while Varus, governor of Syria, was at Jerusalem, a serious revolt broke out. This Varus quieted. Sabinus, a procurator sent to Palestine after Herod's death, pending the settlement of the question of succession, pursued a policy which fanned the flames of revolt. At the Feast of Pentecost, myriads of the Jews besieged Sabinus and his soldiers. A terrible battle was fought, to the disadvantage of the Jews. The Romans set fire to the porticoes of the temple which were being used by the Jews as vantage-points; and in the conflagration many Jews were burnt.^ 6. The rebellion spread from the city throughout the country, some indications of its extent and form being given by the mention of: (a) The banding together of two thousand of Herod's veterans for pur- poses of rebellion and gain in Idumea and Judea; (&) The assault under Judas, son of Ezekias, upon the royal armories at Sepphoris in Galilee, and his subsequent use of weapons there obtained for purposes of plunder. He had " a thirst for power, and an ambitious desire for royal rank;" (c) In Perea, Simon, who had been a slave of Herod the king, "was so bold as to put a diadem on his head, and a certain number of the people stood by him, and by their madness he was hailed as king;" (d) "The royal palace at Amatha, near the river Jordan, was also burnt down by a party of men that mustered together, like those belonging to Simon;" (e) "At this time also Athronges, a person eminent neither for the dignity of his progenitors, nor for any great virtue or wealth of his own, as he was only a shepherd, and obscure in all respects, because he was a tall man, and excelled others in the strength of his hands, was so bold as to set up for king." Hav- ing given these specific cases, Josephus contents himself, for the rest, 1 War, ii, i, §§1-3; Antiquities, xvii, 9, §§1-3- 2 War, ii, 2, §3; Antiquities, xvii, 9, §4- 3 War, ii, 3, §§1-4; Antiquities, xvii, 10, §§1-3. 112 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE with a summary statement of the situation: "And now Judea was full of bands of robbers, and as the several companies of the seditious lit upon anyone to lead them, he was created a king immediately."' 7. The expedition of Varus, governor of Syria, for the relief of Sabinus, temporary procurator of Judea, who was besieged by the Jews in the royal fortresses in Jerusalem, resulted in : (a) the complete reduction of Galilee, including the burning of Sepphoris, and the sale of its inhabitants as slaves, together with fire and slaughter along the line of march; (b) the surrender of Jerusalem; (c) the traversing of the whole country for the apprehension of the rebels; (d) the crucifixion of two thousand of the leading participants in the revolt.^ 8. An embassy of Jews went to Augustus "to petition for the liberty of living according to their ovm laws," "to plead for the autonomy of their nation." "The main thing they desired was that they might be delivered from kingly and similar governments, and might be added to Syria, and be put under the authority of such chief magistrates as should be sent to them."^ 9. A deputation of the Jewish and Samaritan aristocracy appeared before Augustus to accuse Archelaus, after about nine years of his rule, because of " his barbarous and tyrannical usage of them." That the complaints were serious is evidenced by the summoning of Archelaus to Rome, and his immediate banishment to Gaul.^ ID. A serious revolt of the Jews took place upon the attempt by Quirinius to make a census of Judea for the purposes of taxation according to the Roman method. This was " the enrolment " ordered by Augustus under Quirinius of Syria, with Coponius as procurator of Judea. Only by the persuasion of the high-priest, Joazar, was the census carried through without bloodshed. ^ II. The sect of the Zealots was formed under Judas the Galilean and Sadduc, a Pharisee.^ 1 War, ii, 4, §§1-3; Antiquities, xvii, 10, §§4-8. 2 War, ii, 5, §§1-3; Antiquities, xvii, 10, §§9, 10. 3 War, ii, 6, §§i, 2; Antiquities, xvii, 11, §§i, 2. 4 War, ii, 7, §3; Antiquities, xvii, 13, §2. s War, ii, 8, §1; Antiquities, xviii, i, §1. 6 War, ii, 8, §1; Antiquities, xviii, i, §§i, 6. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 113 12. A complaint was made by Judea in a. d. 1 7 against the burden- some and oppressive taxation to which the province was subjected.^ 13. Out of respect to Jewish conviction it had been the custom of Roman rulers to bring into Jerusalem only such standards as bore no image of eagle or emperor. Pilate determined to set this concession aside. Under cover of night he introduced standards bearing the emperor's bust. The act resulted in a vigorous revolt, which was quieted only by the removal of the offensive emblems.^ 14. " After this Pilate raised another disturbance by expending the sacred treasure, which is called Corban, on an aqueduct, whereby he brought water from a distance of four hundred furlongs." He distributed his soldiers among the clamorous crowds in private dress, and at a signal they fell upon the Jews with staves. Many perished by beatings, and many more were trodden to death in the precipi- tous flight which followed this unexpected charge. ^ 15. The popular uprisings in the time of Pilate of which the Synoptic Gospels give some hint are : (a) " Now there were some present at that very season which told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices;"-* (b) "them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder. "^ 16. The imprisonment and execution of John the Baptist by Herod Antipas happened, Josephus says, because he "feared lest the great ' Tacitus, Annals, ii, 42. For the period from about A. D. 9 to about A. D. 26, Josephus seems to have been without sources in the writing of his works. These seventeen years he covers in about as many lines, the larger part of the content of which is general Roman history. For Palestine, he knows little more than the succession of high-priests (Antiquities, xviii, 2, §2). Unfortunately, this is the important period in the life of Jesus, that is, from his thirteenth to his thirtieth years. We should like to know of the active external, social, and political factors that had the most potent part in the formation of his Judgments about the future of his people. Happily we are favored with a fairly adequate recital of the trend of events, even in detail, during those highly impressionable years which preceded his visit to the capital as a youth of twelve (Luke 2:41-50). How events in Palestine moved during the later fifteen obscure years we are able to infer with some certainty from the subsequent history. The first record of Josephus, when he is again enabled by his sources to take up the narrative, is of "a very great tumult among the Jews" under the procurator, Pontius Pilate (see 13 above). 2 War, ii, 9, §2, 3; Antiquities, xviii, 3, §r. 3 War, ii, 9, §4; Antiquities, xviii, 3, §2. 4 Luke 13:1. 5 Mark 15:7. 114 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE influence John had over the people might put it into his power and indination to raise a rebellion.'" 17. The hostile intentions of Herod Antipas toward Jesus were doubtless wholly based upon his fear of the possible political influence of Jesus in a direction hke to that suspected of John the Baptist.^ §7. General Significance of These Events for Jesus When it is had in mind that this survey of some of the principal events, falling within the lifetime of Jesus, that had social, rehgious, or political significance, covers less than one half of his life,^ and that we may assume with confidence a similar series for the unrecorded por- tion, it becomes apparent at once that he had a mass of contemporary history of such a kind that it was safe to base upon it large deductions for the future. Viewed from the standpoint of Roman policy, these events make evident an attitude of growing intolerance and severity on the part of the direct rulers of Palestine. Considered from the Jewish position, they exhibit a constantly deepening sense of national oppression, and a determination that was leading to more effectively organized protestation and open revolt, in the hope for a betterment of conditions. §8. Special Significance of the Rise of the Zealot Movement Far and away the most significant among those events which fell within the lifetime of Jesus, the event having within it most potency for the future of the Jewish people, was one that happened in the most impressionable years of Jesus, close to the period of his visit to Jerusalem as a youth. This event was the formation of the sect of the Zealots, under Judas the Galilean, in the year of the census, a. d. 6 or A. D. 7. To this sect Josephus attributes again and again in the course of his narrative all the disturbances, uprisings, revolts, rebellions, and consequent distresses and miseries which came upon his people from the time of its organization to the end of the great war of A. D. 66-73. For any adequate understanding of the course of Jewish history, from the youth of Jesus till the last outpost was taken by the Romans in a. d. 73, there is necessary as full knowledge as is ' Antiquities, xviii, 5, §2. 2 Luke i3'-3i- ^ See p. 113, n. i. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 1 15 possible of the Zealots. The information which Josephus gives of the inner life and motives of the sect is scanty; he has utter disdain for the movement. We may use fully his account given in connection with its origin. Having told of the revolt at the time of the census, and its quieting by the high-priest who urged submission, he continues: But one Judas, a Gaulanite, of a city whose name was Gamala, joining him- self to Sadduc a Pharisee, was eager to draw them to a revolt. Both said that this taxation was nothing but a direct introduction of slavery, and exhorted the nation to arrest their liberty, as if they could procure them happiness and security for what they possessed, and if they failed in the happiness that would result from this, they would acquire honor and glory for magnanimity. They also said that God would not assist them unless they joined with one another energetically for success, and still further set about great exploits, and did not grow weary in executing the same. And the men heard what they said with pleasure, and so this bold attempt proceeded to a great height. All sorts of misfortunes also sprang from these men, and the nation was infected by them to an incredible degree: one violent war came upon us after another, and we lost our friends who used to alle- viate our pains; there were also very great robberies, and murders of our principal men, under pretext indeed of the public welfare, but in reality from the hopes of private gain. Hence arose seditions, and owing to them political murders, which sometimes fell on their own people (from the madness of these men toward one another, and their desire that none of their rivals should be left), and sometimes on their enemies; a famine also came upon us, and reduced us to the last degree of despair, as did also the taking and demolishing of cities, nay, faction at last in- creased so high, that the very temple of God was burnt down by the enemies' fire. So greatly did the alteration and change from the custom of our fathers tend to bring all to destruction who thus banded together, for Judas and Sadduc, who in- troduced a fourth philosophic sect among us, and had a great many followers therein, filled our state with tumults at the time, and laid the foundations of future miseries by their system of philosophy which we were before unacquainted with, concerning which I shall discourse a little, and that the rather, because the infection which spread thence among our younger men, who were zealous for it, brought our nation to destruction.' Josephus has made clear here the ultimate results of Zealotism to the nation. To indicate, even in outhne form, the activities of the sect would be to sketch Jewish history from a. d. 7 to a. d. 73. No stronger general testimony could be borne to their influence than the fact that Josephus looks upon them as one of the sects of his people, and places them, in description, with Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. Hav- I Antiquities, xviii, i, §1. Ii6 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE ing described these other sects he passes to the Zealots, and here seems inclined to a more judicial statement of their characteristics: But Judas the Galilean was the author of the fourth sect of Jewish philosophy. Its pupils agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions, but they have an inviolable attachment to liberty, and say that God is their only ruler, and lord. They also do not mind dying any kinds of death, nor indeed do they heed the tortures of their relations and friends, nor can any such fear make them call any man lord. And since this immovable resolution of theirs is well known to a great many, I shall speak no further about that matter; for I am not afraid that any- thing I have said of them should be disbelieved, but rather fear that what I have said comes short of the resolution they show when they undergo pain.^ It is abundantly evident, then, that the movement was a theocratic revival of a vigorous and persistent type. But in the light of the knowledge, otherwise possessed, as to the place held in this age by that personalized theocratic expectation which centered about a Messiah, the inquiry forces itself to the front whether Josephus has not drawn his sketch in too broad outlines, and whether for the Zealots a simple, theocratic ideal or, on the other hand, the hope for a definite messianic person was the impelling motive of their movement. If the latter, we can expect no adequate indication of it from our historian, for he writes for the Roman world and to justify and glorify his people. Athwart his path to this goal, if the history be wTitten to the truth, there lies always a great stumbling-block — the fact of the part played by the messianic hope; for in attachment to it, conceived under Zealot forms, lay true treason. So throughout his history of definite events he designates the Zealots as "robbers," against whom the men of repute among the Jews are themselves standing. Josephus assumes toward the messianic ideal an all but absolute silence throughout both the War and the Antiquities. Yet the mask cannot be forever worn, and once, toward the end, it falls away long enough to permit a sight of the reality behind it. After having described the terrors of the siege of Jerusalem and of the burning of the temple, he pauses in his narrative for some general observations, among which is this : But what most stirred them up to the war was an ambiguous oracle that was found also in their sacred writings, that about that time one from their country should become ruler of the world. The Jews took this prediction to belong to ' Anliquities, xviii, i, §6. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM n? themselves, and many wise men were thereby deceived in their judgment. Now, this oracle certainly denoted the rule of Vespasian, who was declared emperor in Judea.' We have only to bring together the two statements, that the war was brought on by the Zealots, and that incitement to it came from the messianic hope, to have before us the explanation, luminous and convincing, of the intensity of the Jews in the war, and the understand- ing, full and satisfying, of the inner life of the Zealot movement. The central tenet and inspiring motive of the Zealot movement was the bringing-in of the messianic era by an appeal to the sword. §9. Attitude of Jesus toward the Zealot Movement With the fundamental feature of the conception of the Messiah which underlay the Zealot purpose, and with the drastic method by which the Zealots hoped to establish the Messiah's kingdom, Jesus expressed no degree of sympathy. At the opening of his ministry he had cast aside forever that conception.^ But his attitude went beyond that of negation; he saw and announced that the movement would mean, ultimately, the nation's ruin. Such a form of national hope, tenaciously held, could have only one end under any ordinary circumstances; held and avowed and aggressively expressed under such an opposing power as that of the Romans, its outcome was doubly evident to the clear rehgious and pohtical vision of Jesus. The obvious outcome of Zealotism could be averted only by one or the other or both of two factors: (i) Some counter pohtical move- ment of genuine vitaUty and power of appeal to the nation as now constituted, or (2) the introduction of some new rehgious force through which the fundamental position of the Zealot party should be corrected. §10. Pharisaism and Sadduceeism in Relation to the Zealot Movement Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes stood over against Zealots as factors in the national life. As a pohtical and rehgious party, the Essenes may be disregarded; they were rather a monastic order. 1 War, vi, 5, §4- 2 Matt. 4:1-11 =Mark 1:12, i3 = Luke 4'-i-i3- Ii8 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE From them nothing could be hoped that would offset the propaganda of the Zealots. For the Pharisees, the sad disappointment of their messianic hopes as centered upon successive Asmoneans had led to such a modification in the forms of that hope that now the kingdom of the Messiah was viewed as a product of the direct activity of God, to come in his own time and then only, and without their inter- vention or aid. This Pharisaic attitude was modified only by the force of events, that is, by the success, among the people, of the Zealot appeal. Pharisees gave themselves reluctantly at last to the attempt to direct the popular movement which they could not suppress. Josephus was a Pharisee;^ at the siege of Jerusalem he acted as mediator between Titus and the besieged; his address counseling cessation of hostility may be taken as an exposition of the Pharisaic position as to the method of advance toward the messianic kingdom, expressed in forms agreeable to his prospective readers, that is, with direct messianic reference omitted. The whole address is illuminat- ing ; its summary suffices to exhibit its central contention : And, to speak generally, we can produce no example wherein our fathers got any success by war, or failed of success without war, when they committed them- selves to God. When they stayed at home they conquered, as it pleased their judge, but when they went out to fight, they always met with reverses Thus it appears that warfare is never allowed oiu- nation; but that capture always follows our fighting. For I suppose that such as inhabit this holy place ought to commit the disposal of all things to God, and to disregard the hand of men, when they plead to the judge above. ^ Such was the theory of Pharisaism — a policy of inaction in all that touched the messianic hope as related to Roman dominance. It was obvious to Jesus that in this policy of negation there lay no effective offset to the policy of aggression and action which characterized the Zealots, for "they said that God would not assist them unless they joined with one another energetically for success, and still further set about great exploits, and did not grow weary in executing the same."^ As for the Sadducean party, they were wealthy, priestly aristocrats, the security of whose possessions and the perpetuity of whose place and power was better assured under the continuance of Roman rule than under any state of society which revolution was likely to bring, ' I'ije, §2. 2 War, v, 9, §4. 3 Antiquities, xviii, i, §1. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM "9 They had not the religious conviction in any sphere which could make them national reUgious forces against the current of a popular move- ment toward Zealotism; they had no inclination to take a formative place in molding popular opinion; they were ready to act only when action was futile. Within the nation itself, as constituted m Jesus' day, there was no movement, counter to that of the Zealots, which compared with it in power of popular appeal, or which had in it any promise of ability to check the onward rush of that new sect which had arisen during the youth of Jesus. §11. The Messianic Ideals of Jesus in Relation to Those of Zealotism Jesus himself stood for the introduction into the Jewish national life of a conception of the Messiah and his kingdom which should strike at the fundamental tenets of the Zealots. It was destined, if accepted, to conquer by completely supplanting, by radical reconstruc- tion. Within it lay tke power to neutralize those elements of the Zealot position which threatened to be the most deadly to the national life. The messianic ideals of Jesus once accepted in a broad way by his people, Zealotism must die out for want of a motive. The rule of God conceived in the terms of Jesus excludes the conflict of Caesar and God. It is from a mind keenly alive to both political and religious tendencies, and to the presence of their solution, that there springs the words: "If thou hadst known in this day, even thou, the things which belong unto peace ! but now they are hid from thine eyes .... thou knowest not the time of thy visitation.'" The nation sorely needed in those days of factional fanaticism set against factional quiescence or indifference the voice of a prophet who should break the trend toward messianic Hteralism or scholasticism. The prophet had come and had spoken; for his message he is now brought to the eve of death. He alone has grasped the import of his message and its possible relation to the future political and rehgious life of his peo- ple, its power as a corrective to fatal tendencies. Out of the situation of the hour there arises within the mind of Jesus the conviction that present movements will run to their bitter end. To this conviction » Luke 19:42, 44C. I20 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE he gives expression.' That the national disaster had its uhimate basis in the rejection of the prophetic word in which lay the power of national regeneration through the elimination of pohtical messianism was a constant element of the thought of Jesus.^ The rejection of the messenger of the true messianism received an added significance, as prophetic of the national future, from the fact that the aggressively vigorous and rigorous form of this rejection was itself dictated, in large measure, by political considerations. It was a move originating in the results of previous uprisings incited by Zealots, and now carried out on the basis of pohtical expediency by Sadducees,^ and acquiesced in and aggravated by Pharisees,'* doubtless even with them more largely on pohtical than on moral or rehgious grounds. Well may Jesus ask: "If they do these things in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry? "^ If they ruthlessly dispose of such a life for the supposed preservation of national existence in these days of com- parative pohtical quiet, to what lengths may they be expected to go for expediency's sake when the pohtical situation becomes acute? In those days the last shreds of a moral element in the messianic hope will have vanished. There is hope left in one word only, "repent," and it is a word of both religious and political content; probably, indeed, for the hour, it has more of political than of religious content.^ But the mad decision has aheady been made; mihtant messianism will stalk on to the doom of the nation. ' Matt. 23:34-39 = Luke 11:49-51 (P §i8B) and 13:34, 35 (P §42B). It is be- lieved that document MK, not document P, gives the historical setting of the discourse to which these sayings probably belong, namely, MK 12: 38-40 = Matt., chap. 23. 2 Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen, Mark 12:1-11; and that of the Marriage Feast, Matt. 22: 1-10 = Luke 14:15-24. 3 John 11:47-50. s Luke 23:31. 4 Luke 23:2, 5, 14. 6Lukei3:3, 5. CHAPTER III THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS AND THE DAY OF THE SON OF MAN § I. The Time and Method of the Destruction of Jerusalem, and Their ImpHca- tions § 2. Jesus' Twofold Concern for the Future § 3. The Disciples in the National Upheaval— Their Prospective Longings Treated by Jesus § 4. A Grave Peril to the Disciples m the Future — the Rise of Messianic Claim- ants § 5. Resuhant State of the Disciples, and Consequent Demand for a Constructive Statement by Jesus § 6. A Positive Statement from Jesus as to the Future § 7. The Single Theme and Its Relation to "the Day of Jehovah" § 8. The Simplicity of Jesus' Thought about "the Day"— the Thought Examined § 9. The Foremost Question Raised by the Sketch from Jesus §10. Negative .Aspects of Jesus' Portrayal of "the Day" §11. Standpoint from which the Positive Aspects of Jesus' Thought Must Be Viewed — an Effort at Contrasts CHAPTER III THE RISE OF ^lESSIANIC CLAIMANTS AND THE DAY OF THE SON OF MAN §1. The Time and Method of the Destruction of Jeru- salem, AND Their Implications In the outlook of Jesus, the destruction of Jerusalem was not an event of the far distant future, an event lying indefinitely within the times yet to come. For him, it fell inside the limits of the Ufetime of that generation to which his message had been addressed. Even those men who were the hearers of his forecast would themselves be participants, in part, in the great struggle which should end with the casting-down of the city-" All these things shall come upon this generation."^ It is to be observed, moreover, that the terms by which Jesus depicts that dire event are those of a natural process, wrought by human forces.^ There is an entire absence of the play of supramundane powers, of that which is dramatic or castastrophic in the apocalyptic sense. The destruction of the city is to be effected by the contention of vast human forces, working gradually to a chmax. These two considerations— (i) that the event falls within the present generation, (2) that it is effected through the clash of human agencies- imply that the years near at hand and more distant will be, for the Jewish people, a time of constant ferment, will be made up of days of debate, of inner conflict, of suffering and sacrifice, of exaltation and despair, of hopes and disillusionments— all these spreading over years and culminating in the great disaster. §2. Jesus' Twofold Concern for the Future For that period of years of national distraction and desperation the outlook of Jesus had a double aspect; for him there lay within that period a twofold concern-that for his people and that for his dis- ciples. As to the effects and outcome for his people as a whole, I Luke 13:3, 5; Luke 11: 49-51= Matt. 23:34-36- a Luke 19:43, 44; Luke 23:28-31; Mark 13:14-20. 123 124 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Jesus saw them with clearness and expressed them with vigor.' But what of that group of people who had attached themselves to him ? To them, what would these days of national distress mean — these years through which that people of which they were a part should painfully move toward the final great agony ? §3. The Disciples in the National Upheaval — Their Prospective Longings Treated by Jesus How real a problem, how distinct a problem, those coming years held for the fraternity of Jesus will be felt with force when it is recog- nized that they faced those years with an attitude toward the national hope, toward messianism, unlike that of their contemporaries. For their fellow-countrymen, the nerve of that Zealot movement which, through these years, should hasten them on to their destruction would be the hope of the Messiah yet to be, yet to rule a free people. For the disciples of Jesus, that problem of the Messiah was already a settled one; they interpreted Jesus to be the Messiah. Viewed from the standpoint of the days when Jesus was present with his disciples, viewed thence by Jesus himself, those future years, therefore, loomed up as fraught with the very gravest dangers to his group of disciples, with dangers not included in those which would result inevit- ably from their propaganda, not covered by the forms of persecution to which they would be subjected — namely, with dangers touching this central idea in their interpretation of him, his work as the Messiah. Jesus recognized that certain serious perils, inactive while he was present, would threaten his movement when he was gone. So long as Jesus was with his body of followers, it was always open to them to locate in the future of his life and work that which was lacking in the present in the fulfilment of messianic expectation. This they con- stantly did, finding in his prospective arrival at Jerusalem the time of worthy messianic activities. But how would it be after he was gone — and gone without expected and normal messianic vindication ? This was a serious question whatever the form of future circumstances, even with those most favorable to the nurturing of the new faith of the disciples. But with what gravity that future must have been viewed by Jesus when his vision presented to him his disciples as moving in I Chap, ii, "The Destruction of Jerusalem." THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS 125 the midst of persecutions of the most drastic kind, in the midst of national distresses calculated to prove a test to the most steadfast and heroic souls among the Jews. What a time for the propagation by his disciples of a movement which should profess to give answer to precisely those theocratic problems about which all this national desperation centered ! Adherence to an inactive Messiah of the past during days in which the sorest persecutions are being suffered, dur- ing days in which the national life is in the balance ! Then, if ever, the disciples of Jesus will revert to the old form of their messianic hope. Then, if ever, they will long for some display of messianic presence and power more in accord with that popular contemporary hope to which they were once attached. Then, if ever, they will feel the weakness of their apologetic for Jesus as the Messiah. Then, if ever, their hearts will cry out, with a touch of deep despair and dis- appointment, for one day of the rule of a Messiah such as they once dreamed of, such as many of their contemporaries are expecting, such as seems called for by the national crisis, but such as Jesus of Nazareth has not proved himself to be. It is to this prospective peril, clearly foreseen and strongly feh by Jesus, that he makes refer- ence in his words to his disciples: "Days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it."' By these plain words, spoken while he was yet with them, Jesus does all that may be done in advance to fortify his disciples against that peril to the movement which future persecutions and the events leading to the destruction of Jerusalem are certain to beget. And this forecast serves in a double way as a guard. It fortifies by its recognition and mention beforehand of the danger, and again by the explicitness, even bluntness, of the assertion that all such desire in those days is vain — "ye shall not see it." By these words the disciples were made ready, so far as possible, to hold fast in the days of severest persecution, in the days of most extreme national peril, to the messianic ideals imparted to them by Jesus; to hold out against the tendency, natural and inevitable, toward the longing and the hope for messianic intervention of a supramundane kind. I Luke 17:22. 126 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE §4. A Grave Peril to the Disciples in the Future — THE Rise of Messianic Claimants For the mind of Jesus, then, the near future was viewed in a double aspect. He saw it as holding for his nation certain disaster; he saw it as holding for his disciples possible disaster. And, similarly, the most active and vital factor in the near future of his people's hfe in Palestine, as he saw it, namely, Zealotism, had for his vision a double significance. As to the nation as a whole, it was Zealotism that was to lead it to its ruin.' But what was the thought of Jesus as to the effect of the Zealot movement upon his own movement in the years during which both would move side by side ? It could not be sup- posed by Jesus that a national messianic movement of such intensity and power as could suffice to carry the nation to a bitterly contested end would be without appreciable inner effect upon the movement represented by his disciples. Outwardly, the results of Zealotism, as felt by the disciples in the form of a distracted social environment, would lead to a yearning after a Messiah of present activity and of social power. But what effect would the inner ideals and motive forces of Zealotism produce upon the disciples? In the degree in which the Zealot propaganda at any given period might place empha- sis upon the more material or political elements in its programme, it would move away from the distinctive message which was to be heralded by the disciples of Jesus. At such periods, therefore, it would prove no serious peril to the inner life of the society of Jesus, especially so long as its activities were being crowned with success and the days of defeat and distress still lay in the future. But it would be very different at times when the religious emphasis in Zealot- ism was uppermost, at times when the sole or the dominating power in the movement would reside in the appeal to the messianic hope. And this latter emphasis was certain to be most closely associated with those periods when success was wanting, when failure threatened, periods when the Zealots turned away from prowess to a more tran- scendent form of aid to their ends. At such times, Zealotism would draw nearer, in its central appeal, to the contemporary movement represented in the disciples, and so would bear in itself a peril to the community of Jesus. So long as Zealotism, in its pushing forward • Chap, ii, "The Destruction of Jerusalem," §§8-ii. THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS 127 of the messianic expectation, kept the minds of its adherents upon some unknown Messiah of the future, its influence could not be large upon that body of men who had the conviction that the Messiah had already come in Jesus. But Zealotism did not win its adherents and make its great advances by an indefinitely deferred hope. The emergence of powerful and commanding persons, especially at crises in the history of Zealotism, was the occasion for the transmutation of hope into supposed realization. In days when the breath of the nation's life was the messianic hope, it needed only that the individual rise perceptibly above the level of the multitude to occasion the central- ization in him of that national hope. That this inevitable trend of Zealotism had manifested itself more than once during the life of Jesus cannot be doubted. Aside from those popular messianic interpretations which centered in Jesus, and of which the gospels give clear indication, the period of his lifetime was notable as that of the rise and rapid growth of Zealotism. It may be concluded with con- fidence, in the light of the experiences of Jesus and of the subsequent history of the Zealot movement, that messianic values were more than once attached to Zealot leaders between the time of the birth and of the death of Jesus. Had Josephus not been a pensioner of Roman emperors, his account of Judas of Galilee, the founder of Zealotism (a. d. 6 or 7) would show more truthfully and adequately the relation of his sect to messianism, and the messianic claims and values attached to the founder himself. As to this phase of the significance of Judas and his movement, the author of Acts has transmitted the more illuminating account. By recording Gamahel as placing the agita- tion under Judas of Galilee in the same category with that caused by Jesus of Galilee, he has apparently stamped it as a messianic move- ment.' Were we in possession of the history of Zealotism during those seventeen years within Jesus' Hfetime of which Josephus tells us practically nothing (a. d. 9-26), we should, doubtless, have the record of more than one other personahzing of the messianic hope in a dominant character. => That which Jesus observed of Zealot messianic tendencies while he ' Acts 5:33-39. 2 For a history of the growth of this tendency from the death of Jesus to the destruction of Jeruslaem, see chap, iv, §6. 128 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE was with his disciples, he was well assured would continue and be aggravated in the years to come. As the contest with Rome became closer and fiercer, the religious element would receive heavier empha- sis; as the despair of defeat deepened, the necessity and opportunity for messianic claims would be enlarged. It is from a mind which has taken recognition of current messianic tendencies, which has read the future in the present, which, above all, is concerned for the life of his society in that future of messianic uprisings that the prophecy and exhortation is expressed: "And they shall say to you, Lo, there! Lo, here! go not away, nor follow after them.'" §5. Resultant State of the Disciples, and Consequent Demand for a Constructive Statement by Jesus Some serious and sustained effort of the historical imagination is demanded, some sympathetic attempt at the adjustment of historical perspective is imperative, if one would attain to an adequate appre- hension of the messianic content of the disciples' minds after Jesus had thus brought before them so much that had a future reference. Not that for them, in the present at least, the prohibition of attach- ment to future messianic claimants presented itself as a prospective deprivation. Jesus sufficed in that hour, and they had believed that he had a future. Of more significance to them was it, that he had said that all desire of theirs, in certain trying days that were to come, for a day of the Messiah, was unwarranted and futile — " Ye shall not see it:' Whatever the limitations of vision which had marked the disciples previous to Jesus' final arrival at Jerusalem, it may be beheved that they had come to some degree of reahzation that Jesus was soon to be separated from them. With the dawTi of that consciousness would come a flood of questions touching the future. Present with them, and regarded as about to attain, Jesus was intelligible as Messiah — a Messiah with a future. But, when once place is given to the behef that he is about to leave, then problems of magnitude and gravity rise and clamor for solution. The whole ground on which rests the messianic interpretation of him by his disciples quakes. The main supports, ' Luke 17:23. THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS 129 the only stable supports, for their faith in him were grounded in what they believed lay in the very near future ; these were being undermined by the closer-pressing evidences of the proximity of his death. Faith grounded thus must either die in his death, or it must be transferred beyond his death and there find basis for its activity. Outside these alternatives for their present faith, there is another solution of the problem, namely, so to correct their ideas that the objects of hope are found to be fully realized in the present. In the case of Jesus, dealing with the body of men to whom he was addressing himself, men dominated by rigid preconceptions as to the work of the Messiah, the last-suggested solution would impose a Herculean task, a task which must be pronounced practically impossible. The limit of the capacity of men for new and unwelcome truth, and the necessity which this places upon the bearer of that truth for some approxima- tion to the standpoint of his hearers, for some attempt to throw into old forms a new concept even at the expense of precision and finahty, must be had in mind in any examination of what Jesus had to say when he was in the presence of the most stubborn of contemporary expectations. Of quite as much importance is it to recognize, that by the very vigor of his negation of views held by his disciples he was obligated to fashion some positive statement. He had warned them against the attachment of themselves to any messianic claimants of the future, against the false step of seeking to find in any new mes- sianic movement a more concrete realization of their expectations. He had forecast their ardent desire for a day of the Son of man, but had asserted that the desire would remain unsatisfied in its ardency by any fulfilment — " Ye shall not see it.''' §6. A Positive Statement from Jesus as to the Future Has Jesus no outline of the future ? Can he offer no substitute for the persistent form of the national hope ? Will he make no conces- sions to the natural and normal demand of the Jewish mind for some "Day"? Is there absent from his consciousness all sense of the universal human demand for consummation and chmax in the order of the universe ? The situation is critical, the demand scarcely short of imperative. He will make concession: I30 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE The Day of the Sox of Man I : I As the lightning, when it Hghteneth out of the one part under the heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven ; so shall the Son of man be in his day. 1:2 As it came to pass in the days of Noah, even so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. 1 : 3 Likewise even as it came to pass in the days of Lot ; they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but in the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brim- stone from heaven, and destroyed them all: After the same manner shall it be in the day that the Son of man is revealed. 2:1 In that day, he which shall be on the housetop, and his goods in the house, let him not go down to take them away : and let him that is in the field hkewise not return back. Remember Lot's wife. 2:2 In that night there shall be two men on one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left: there shall be two women grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. And they answering say imto him. Where, Lord ? And he said unto them. Where the body is, thither will the vultures also be gathered together.' I Luke 17:24-37. It will be observed that, in the above citation of this para- graph, vss. 25 and 33 have been omitted. Certain reasons for eliminating them were suggested on pp. 65, 66. These may now be recalled and supplemented by others. It may be said in general, that these verses form obvious interruptions to the movement of the clearly unified thought of the paragraph, and therefore are called in question as origi- nal parts of this portrayal. Both are found in other, more appropriate contexts. In par- ticular, as to vs. 33: (i) The introduction of the verse at this point seems to be due to its reference to the saving and the losing of life, a subject that is treated in vss. 31, 32. {2, The connection in thought between vss. 31 and 32, and vs. 33 is apparently super- ficial only, for the saying of Jesus in vs. ^;i surely strikes far deeper than loss of the life of the body such as is referred to in a vague way by vss. 31, 32. (3) The pro- found saying of Jesus in vs. ^^ was so easily remembered and so quotable in isolation THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS 131 §7. The Single Theme and Its Relation to "the Day OF Jehovah" There is no confusion of theme here, no departure from a direct and exclusive treatment of one subject. The mind is led into a vast, obscure region; but the mystery of it is not intensified by variety of terms. Jesus here gives expression to his thought about "The Day of the Son of man"— nothing else. There is no introduction of any other phrases from the range of eschatological vocabulary. By this steadfast explication of the content of one term, and one term only, he rebukes blurred thought in a region where, at the best, clear vision is difficult. He does not concern himself with some offshoot from the original idea of "the day;" he goes back to a primal term. He does not give his thought to some subsidiary phase of the day, some necessary complement of it, but dehneates the day itself. The term was old. "The day of Jehovah" had been central in his people's thought for centuries. "The day of the Son of man" was "the day of Jehovah" rephrased to fit the later increase of emphasis, in the national thought, upon the place of an anointed representative of Jehovah. Wherever the figure of the Messiah loomed into significance that it was likelv to find points of attachment which cannot be historically justified. (4) The reporters of the words of Jesus, influenced doubtless by the early persecution experiences of the disciples, tended to a physical interpretation of this saying wherever it appeared. Aside from its insertion in the present passage, there is a notable mstance of such interpretation in Mark 8 : 34-9: i, o" which see pp. 79-82. But this physical interpretation is a serious reduction of the content of Jesus' words in both passages. As to the omission above of Luke 17:25, in particular: (i) It stands between similar members in the description of the "day" in a way so obvious as to mark it as highly inappropriate to this place. (2) Its verbal form is such as relates it in origin to a sim- ilar form used on more fitting occasions (Mark 8:31; 9:3^; to: 33)- (3) It attaches the features of the "day" to Jesus in a way not justified by the impersonal attitude of Jesus throughout this sketch. (4) Its content is such that its being placed here as the result of actual historv is natural. (5) It assumes on the part of Jesus a defimte mes- sianic interpretation of himself to his disciples-something exceedingly rare in his career (6) The words are inappropriate if this discourse was spoken in the last hours, as is hinted bv certain evidence already noted (chap, i), for rejection had already taken place, and the prospective suffering was in some measure apprehended by the disciples. Thesi two verses do not appear in Matthew at the place where he uses the body of this paragraph, that is, in the farewell discourse (Matt. 24:26-27, 37-41)- (7) It is ap- parently an endeavor to bring "his day" into close sequence with his rejection and suffering. But this Jesus has negatived, it seems, within this discourse by his words, "Ye shall not see it." 132 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE in the thought upon the future, there "the day of Jehovah" would tend to recede in favor of "the day of Messiah" or "the day of the Son of man." Hence the sketch given by Jesus here might be cor- rectly designated as an exposition of his conception of " the day of Jehovah." There is no personal actor standing in the foreground, the center of the movement. The substitution of "Son of man" for "Jehovah" simply meets the fact that in his time, and espe- cially for the group of men he was now addressing, the religious hope had shifted from the direct action of Jehovah to that of his human representative. Sharply to recognize that Jesus here deals with a single theme, and with that theme by a title which places him in Hne with his people's ancient thought as currently expressed, is the first step toward an adequate exphcation and correct appreciation of his own thought. §8. The Simplicity of Jesus' Thought about "the Day" — THE Thought Examined The dominant impression made by Jesus' exposition of his thought about "the day" is that of the extreme simphcity of the ideas ex- pressed. These may all be compassed by a few words : I : I The day will be characterized by suddenness of appearance and brevity of duration, that is, by instantaneousness. It will come without preceding indications; and will be realized not as a process, but as an event. 1 : 2 The day will come in the midst of the normal movements of human life. It will come suddenly and completely within the limits of a brief space of time. It will come preceded by no advance sug- gestions of its arrival, except such as are exhibited in the words and activities of those who believe in its coming. 1:3 Repetition of the ideas in 1:2. 2:1 All of destiny that the day holds for men is determined and allotted so quickly that no human movement may take place between its dawn and its setting, its coming and its going. It is not so much a "day" as a flash of time within a day. 2:2 The meaning and significance of the day, its occasion and purpose, consist in the fact that it is the period of the apportionment THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS I33 to men of their destiny. From this point their ways diverge, for " the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left." So simple and so few are the ideas about " the day" to which Jesus gives expression here, that any restatement of them seems like an elabo- ration or enlargement. Certainly the attempted restatement tends to err on the side of unwarranted expansion rather than exclusion. By Suddenness, Unexpectedness, Brevity of Duration, Largeness of Significance to Mankind— by these few words "the day," as Jesus viewed it, may be described. §9. The Foremost Question Raised by the Sketch FROM Jesus The mind of the disciples fastened at once upon that phase of Jesus' description which was most impressively foreign to their own ideas. "The one shall be taken''— hy this there was opened to them a new vista into the future. The day of the Messiah was not, then, to usher in the new and more glorious era of Israel's history in Palestine. It was not, then, to begin the period of the dominance of a new Jerusalem. "The one shall be taken''— not, then, left to enjoy the supposed felicities of the expected age of the Messiah on the earth. This is an apparent reversal of beliefs, a denial of hopes. This seems to bring the day without the fruits of the day. " The one shall he taken"— \xd\ then, if taken, taken where? This is the natural and immediate question: "And they answering say unto him, Where, Lord?" But for Jesus to have gone one step farther in dramatization would have meant to enter the forbidden, if not, indeed, the unknown or, at least, unsketchable region. " And he said unto them. Where the body is, thither will the vultures also be gathered together" — that is to say. They will be taken to a region appropriate to their essential nature. §10. Negative Aspects of Jesus' Portrayal of "the Day" This portrayal by Jesus of "the day of the Son of man" is quite as remarkable in its negative as in its positive side. The vast area of thought centering about that day, as developed by the speculation of men, into which Jesus does not enter at all, exhibits by contrast in an impressive way the restraint of Jesus. The absence of all that is 134 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE spectacular is notable; it is not even dramatic in the sense of making an appeal to the eye, and as having in it shifting scenes. If it is a drama, it is begun and completed in a single momentan^ act with no scenes. Yet it alone occupies the stage, and it is not preceded by minor, monitory plays. Again, if it is a drama, it is without a con- spicuous central figure in action; the day centers about a person in that it is his day, but it is the fates of the day for men, not that person, which emerge in the movement. The dispensation of destiny in that day is not the arrival at justice, but the administration of it. There is no exhortation to men to have a sharp lookout for the day; that is vain—" ye shall not see it. " There is an entire absence of time indi- cation, except this negation of all desiring and looking for it on the part of the generation to whom Jesus addresses his words. By his omissions Jesus has contributed quite as much to a true knowledge of the day as by his assertions. §11. Standpoint from Which the Positive Aspects of Jesus' Sketch Must Be Viewed — an Effort at Contrasts It must be held steadily in mind that the assertions about " the day" are drawn from Jesus by the needs of a critical hour, and are formu- lated as the direct offset to a definite body of convictions entertained by his hearers of the hour. Jesus does not sketch " the day" that the disciples' knowledge of the future may be larger and more precise. He is concerned at this time to solve the practical problem of opposing to a rigidly entertained conception of " the day" some other conception which will make the near future of his society more secure. The members of that society beheve in a "day" which shall have both its reahzation and the resting-place of its results upon earth. They look to a "day" which will bring social regeneration and political freedom. When Jesus has gone, the Zealot movement will intervene to promise these. The security of the society of Jesus hes, therefore, in the present uprooting of this false expectation, and the implanting of a new idea of the nature of " the day." This can be accomplished only by heroic measures, and it is to these that Jesus gives himself in his sketch of "the day." The demands of the hour upon Jesus must be held in mind by the interpreter of Jesus. His sketch, then, is not so much one of ])recision as of corrective power. To the idea of a THE RISE OF MESSIANIC CLAIMANTS 135 "day" brought in by a long process of social upheaval and j)olilical struggle, he opposes a "day" which is "as the lightning." In the place of a "day" which comes as a relief to a disturbed society, he puts a "day" which falls upon men while life is moving in a normal way. He does not view the "day" as one given over to regenerative adjustment, but as one in which no change of state will be possible. For him it is not a day of separation followed by the destruction of the unrighteous, but of separation effected by the transportation of the righteous. From its nature, as defined by him, it is seen to be not a product of human activity on earth, but one having its initiative in the heaven. To the idea of a social, pohtical, locahzed result of the "day," he opposes that which is supramundane and without defined locality. He would have the disciples think of the "day" not as a panacea for their future distresses, but as an occasion of determinative significance in the drama of the universe. In place of the attitude which is ever on the lookout for indications of the "day," and ever receptive to those who are claimants of the power to bring it in, he would substitute that large conception of the "day" which begets incredulity toward any time-defined programme. By these and other phases of his contrast, Jesus makes his sketch of the "day" to be one of corrective power for the disciples to whom he addresses it. At the same time, it stands as one of suggestion, though, by the nature of its origin, not one of absolute precision or ultimate defini- tion for all men.' I These reflections upon Luke 17:22-37 might be correctly given as their title sim- ply the phrase, "The Rise of Messianic Claimants," though in large part the study has centered about "The Day of the Son of Man." For had Jesus not felt it neces- sary to fortify his disciples against Zealotism in its future sure developments, and especially in regard to the effects upon the disciples of the unbearable social and politi- cal environment it would create, it may be conjectured that he would never have depicted "the day of the Son of man" — a portrayal taking its features from the demand upon Jesus for vivid and powerful contrast to the Zealot form of messianic hope. CHAPTER IV THE FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE § I. The Occasion, Time, and Report of the Discourse § 2. Influences Affecting the Sayings of Jesus about the Future § 3. The Opening Forecast and the Resultant Question § 4. The Persecution of the Disciples § 5. The Destruction of Jerusalem § 6. The Rise of Messianic Claimants § 7. Events before the Siege of Jerusalem § 8. The Day of the Son of Man § 9. The Time of the Events §10. Exhortation in the Final Discourse §11. The Mission of the Disciples §12. Reconstruction of the Final Discourse CHAPTER IV THE FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE §1. The Occasion, Time, and Report of the Discourse There is no more striking phenomenon in document MK than the fact that within that document the one discourse of Jesus which is reported at great length is that which deals with the future, MK chap. 13. On the evidence of document MK there seems to be necessary either the conclusion that Jesus spoke with fulness on no other theme, or that this theme had an interest, for those who framed the document MK, so much more intense than any other subject in the teaching of Jesus that everything else became secondary in their memory and in their oral and written report of that teaching. It is not unnatural that the words of Jesus which formed a forecast of events, especially those events falhng within the hfetime of his hearers, should be treasured from the first, should be most often re- peated,' and should finally constitute one of the fullest reports in a document which, on the whole, is devoted primarily to the narration of events. In the period in which the gospel tradition was taking fixed form, no part of it would have so Hvely an interest for the mem- bers of the early community as that which dealt with the very experi- ences through which they were passing. And these experiences of persecution, tumult, national unheaval, war, and impending crisis are precisely those portrayed by the discourse in the thirteenth chap- ter of document MK. The discourse is reported in document MK as spoken by Jesus during the Passion Week, at the close of his last day of active pubhc ministry. The occasion of the discourse was some questions raised by the disciples because of a reference by Jesus to the future com- plete destruction of the Temple. The remark by Jesus was entirely appropriate to the time. The resulting question of the disciples was a natural one. That Jesus should have answered at some length is what might have been expected in view of his prospective separation from his disciples within a few hours. At no previous period in his 137 138 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE relations with them had his disciples been as ready as now to give a receptive hearing to any word from him about the future. Indeed, as to the graver sides of the future, it may be affirmed that, judging from their inability to take Jesus' sayings about his death seriously, they would have given no heed to anything Jesus might have said previous to the present — in which the shadow of the tragedy hung over them. The occasion to which the discourse of Jesus on the future is assigned by document MK is, therefore, the most fitting in his ministry. §2. Influences Affecting the Sayings of Jesus about the Future In any study of the reported sayings of Jesus about the future, the interpreter cannot too often remind himself that he is dealing with that body of material which is more likely to have suffered modifica- tion in the course of transmission than anything else which finds a place in the record of the life of Jesus. That this Hkehhood is a matter of fact in certain parts of the documents seems to be a con- clusion suggested by studies made in chap. i. But ought such a con- clusion to be expected in connection with a study of the thirteenth chapter of document MK? Because of the fact that it deals with the future, independent of any other consideration, it was open to the effects of time and varied opinion in transmission. But when to this general consideration there is added the all-important recognition that this discourse deals, for the most part, with future events which were to fall within the lifetime of the generation of Jesus, it is clear that there is some probability of more or less modification in the say- ings. For they were "sayings," not written prophecies. Even had Jesus given them literary form, the history of interpolation in docu- ments exhibits the danger to which they would have been subjected. Had they immediately taken written form, some check might have been given to modifications. But the transmission of sayings as to the future, and the actual unfolding of that future, went on side by side. It seems inevitable that the latter should affect the former. It seems unavoidable that the sayings should take on the precision afforded by the actual experiences. Further, it was to be expected that, during the fluid period of the sayings of Jesus about the future, FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE I39 they would take on phases suited to the solution of new problems arising during that period. Whether, as a matter of fact, these natural and inevitable tendencies affected the report of this discourse of Jesus, as they certainly would have affected the forecast of any other person, may, perhaps, be determined by a close examination of the discourse. Such is the purpose of the present study. §3. The Opening Forecast and the Resultant Question Gospel MT 24:1-3 DocuiffiNx MK 13:1-4 Gospel LK 21:5-7 A And Jesus went out from the A And as he went forth out of the A An^d as some spake of the tem- temde and was going on his temple, one of his disciples saith pie, how it was adorned with wS-; and hTs disciples came unto him. Master, behold, what goodly stones and oflPerings, to him to shew him the buildings manner of stones and what man- of the temple. ner of buildings ! B But he answered B And Jesus said B ,.. . °^ and said unto them. See ye not unto him, Seest thou these great said, As for these tlnrigs which ye all these things ? verilv I say unto buildings? there shall not be behod, the days will come in vou There shall not be left here left here one stone upon another. which there shall not be left here 8ne stone upon another, that shall which shaU not be thrown down. one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. not be thrown down. C And as he sat on the mount of C And as he sat on the mount C . And they Olives the disciples came unto of Olives over against the temple, asked him, saying. Master, when him privately, saying. Tell us, Peter and James and John and therefore shall these things be? whenshall these things be? and Andrew asked him privately, and what i/iaW 6e the sign what shall be the sign Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign D when these things are all about D ^'hen to be accomplished ? these things are about to come to pass? E of thy com- ing, and of the end of the world ? The opening statement from Jesus, in portion B, does not go be- yond the destruction of Jerusalem; indeed, only by imphcation does it include the city as a whole, for the words prophesy only the ruin of the Temple. The question of the disciples, as reported by document MK, confines itself to that event of which Jesus had spoken, and asks simply when and how the ruin of the Temple is to be effected. In this the evangelist Luke closely follows his document. But Matthew substitutes for "these things," of portion D, the phrases, "of thy coming (Trapoveria), and of the consummation of the aeon," in portion E. He is concerned to represent the disciples as inquiring of Jesus for a complete eschatological programme. It may not be afhrmed that Jesus did not give such a programme simply because it was not asked for by his hearers. But it is to be recalled that "coming {irapovaiay is credited to Jesus in this discourse only, and that its three appearances here, Matt. 24:27, 37, 39, are in portions drawn by Matthew from document P §60, where the phrase of Jesus I40 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE is not "coming {irapovaia) of the Son of man," but "day of the Son of man." The former is a Matthaean term.^ Similarly, the phrase " consummation of the aeon" is peculiar to Matthew, in which gospel it occurs four other times, Matt. 13:39, 40, 49; 28:20, three of which instances are in the exposition of two parables drawn from document M §§156, 18. These expositions are among the striking eschatologi- cal features which so singularly characterize that document. ' Even were it certain that "coming (Trapoi^o-ia)" is an authentic term from Jesus, given at some point in this discourse, it would have to be con- sidered whether the disciples could have asked about its time before they were taught to expect it as an event of the future. It will hardly be held that the idea of some " coming {irapovaia) " formed a part of their present conception of the future of Jesus. Every indication that the gospels give of their hopes seems against such a supposition. In the light of these facts, it would seem that portion E must be re- garded as another evidence of the strong eschatological interest of the Gospel of Matthew. The notion of the Two Aeons has been seen elsewhere as an accretion to the words of Jesus.^ §4. The Persecution of the Disciples In the examination of the discourse, it seems best to give considera- tion at the first to that section of it which has the most extensive gospel testimony, though this leads to a departure from the order of the discourse as now recorded in document MK. That section is the portion dealing with the persecution of the disciples, MK 13:9-13, which Matthew used from document MK in his construction of the discourse on the mission of the disciples, Matt. 10:17-23, and again, in part, in the final discourse. Matt. 24:9-14. Luke used it once only (Luke 21:12-19), but had in his document P a section which is closely related to a part of this Markan paragraph, P§22 = MKi3:ii. Thus there is provided for this body of sayings about persecution a synoptic testimony unsurpassed in volume by that on any other sub- ject in the recorded teaching of Jesus. ' For Matthew and document P in parallelism, see pp. 64-67. » An examination of these expositions is made on pp. 226-35. 3 See p. 57, paragraph 3, and p. 95, paragraph 10. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 141 Gospel MT 10:17-2 A But beware of men: Document MK 13:0-13 A But take ye heed to B Then shall they de- liver you up unto tribu- lation, and shall kill you: yourselves B for B for they shall they will deliver you up deliver you up to coun to councils, and in their synagogues they will scourge you; yea and before governors and kings shall ye be brought for my sake, for a testi- mony to them and to the Gentiles. cils; and m synagogues shall ye be beaten; and before governors and kings shall ye stand for my sake, for a testimony unto them. Gospel LK 21:12-19 B they shall lay their hands on you, and shall persecute you, de- livering you up to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for my name's sake. It shall turn unto you for a testimony. C And the gospel must first be preached unto all the nations. Document P §22 D And when they bring you before the syna- gogues, and the rulers, and the authorities, be not anxious how or what ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour what ye ought to say. F and ye shall be hated of all the nations for my name's sake. G And then shall many stum- ble, and shall deliver up one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray. And because iniquity shall be multiplied, the love of the many shall wax cold. H But he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved. I And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testi- mony unto all the na- tions; and then shall the end come. D But when they deliver you up, be not anxious how or what ye shall speak : for it shall be given you in that hour what ye shall speak. lor it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaieth in you. E And brother shall deliver up brother to death, and the father his child: and children shall rise up against parents, and cause them to be put to death. F And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: D And when they lead you to judgement, and deliver you up, be not anxious beforehand what ye shall speak: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ve that speak, but the Holy Ghost. E And brother shall deliver up brother to death, and the father his child; and children shall rise up against parents, and cause them to be put to death. F And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: D Setde it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before- hand how to answer: for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adver- saries shall not be able to withstand or to gain- say. E But ye shall be de- livered up even by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolk, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death. F And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake. but he that H And that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved. I But when they perse- cute you in this city, flee into the next: for verily T say unto you, Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. endureth to the end, the same shall be saved. not a hair of your head shall perish. In your patience ye shall win your souls. Not only do document MK, gospel LK, and gospel MT (tenth chapter) record a succession of ideas in the same order, idea for idea, and in closely similar, often precisely the same, language, but these ideas form a unit; they have a single theme; they are closely knit 142 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE together. To the accuracy of this statement there is a single excep- tion, the portion C. This verse interrupts very seriously the course of the thought. "And the gospel must first be preached unto all the nations" — what relation does that bear to what precedes or to what follows? "First" — does that mean before they have been delivered up to councils and have had the other experiences of portion B ? Hardly possible. Does it mean before they have the anxiety spoken of in portion D ? Equally difficult to understand. Apparently the thought of the verse is out of place here. Can it be given a place elsewhere in the discourse ? In the chronology of the discourse, perse- cutions are followed by the destruction of Jerusalem, and that destruc- tion immediately precedes the coming of the Son of man. The whole series of events falls within "this generation." This is a complete and consistent order, to which portion C is an interruption and intru- sion. It introduces an entirely new element into the time relations of the future, namely, the completeness or incompleteness of the mission — a factor given no recognition elsewhere in the discourse, and out of keeping with those factors that are regarded as determinative. Moreover, the portion C introduces in a casual way a statement of immeasurable significance as to the extent of the mission. Jesus had not indicated previous to this time, except, perhaps, in a veiled, para- bolic way, that the mission was to extend beyond Israel. That his first intimation of so important an intention should be so incidental, so secondary to a chronological interest, is difficult to believe. The verse assumes a knowledge and full recognition of a world-wide scope for the mission. This the disciples surely did not hold. Their sense of any mission, however Hmited, was vague if not entirely want- ing at this time. Such words as these at this time and in this context would be wholly unintelligible. It may not be assumed, for that reason alone, that Jesus would not speak of the limits of the mission at this time. Often what he said was beyond the present grasp of his hearers. It is urged only that, even with its intelligibility assumed, there is here a method of introducing new and far-reaching truth which departs from the skill of Jesus as elsewhere exhibited. It would hardly be possible to overemphasize the historical improba- bility of such a procedure. Its incongruity fails of its full impression only because the mind is accustomed to think of the disciples as always FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE I43 understanding that they were destined for that kind and that extent of mission which, at the earhest, was a revelation to them from Jesus. It is important to observe that the central word of the verse is " first ; " by this the portion C, as it stands, is altogether a chronological indicator. And as such, it assumes for its hearer or reader a knowl- edge of the mission's aim, which it uses as an index. The total im- pression of portion C, when examined from the internal standpoint, is that it is not an original part of this paragraph or of this discourse. To this conclusion there is external support. The portion C seems to have been absent from the document MK used by Luke, for he gives it no place. Similarly Matthew fails to give evidence of its presence when he is using this document MK paragraph in his con- struction of the discourse on the mission in his tenth chapter. Not only does Matthew omit it; he inserts a reputed saying of Jesus on chronology which directly contradicts it, the portion I, Matt. 10:23. His omission of portion C, in itself, might be explained as intentional, as the result of his use of this paragraph out of its original, document MK connection. But is it to be beheved that Matthew, possessed of a document MK containing the portion C, would deliberately drop that definition of the mission's scope, and, instead, represent Jesus as hmiting the mission to the cities of Israel, and as coming again even before that restricted field should be covered ? On the other hand, if it be supposed that portion C was not present in either the Lukan or Matthaean document MK, the procedure of Matthew is intelhgible, and involves no tampering with his sources on this theme. Docu- ment MK at 7 : 27 gave him a definition by Jesus himself of the scope of the mission, which he interpreted as expressed in Matt. 15:24. This he embodied twice in the discourse on the mission, Matt. 10:5, 6, 23, attaching to it, in the latter instance, that promise of the speedy coming which document MK supplies once in the discourse from which the paragraph Matt. 10:17-22 was taken, namely, in MK 13 : 30, and again, as it seems, in MK 9:1.' The evangehst Matthew may be regarded as having made a union of statements from Jesus supplied by his document MK, after interpreting them as best he could. Matt. 10:23, but he may not reasonably and justly be charged I For a more complete statement of Matthew's method and view-point in this regard, see the examination of MK 7: 27 =Matt. 15 : 24 on pp. 88-92. 144 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE either with omitting a fundamental assertion like that in portion C, or with dehberately substituting for it its direct contradiction as expressed in the portion I of the tenth chapter. With the portion C, Matthew seems not to have been confronted when, by the portion I, he was endeavoring to give chronological content to the discourse which he was constructing on the mission. Therefore it must be said that Luke, and Matthew also in his framing of the tenth chapter, worked with a document MK from which portion C was absent. But how explain the portion I of Matthew's twenty-fourth chap- ter, which is the complete contradiction of the portion I of his tenth chapter, but a parallel in thought to portion C of the present document MK ? As a stage in the solution, it ought to be observed that certain of the difficulties created by portion C, where it stands, do not hold against portion I in Matthew's twenty-fourth chapter. The order of origin seems to be, first Matthew's portion I of chap. 24, then the portion C of document MK. In that order, the obscurities of por- tion C as related to its context are explained by regarding it as being a scribal rewriting of portion I, at first by one upon the margin of the manuscript MK, but subsequently by another in the body of the paragraph, the latter insertion made with a scribal disregard of immediate context. Thus regarded, the saying was first attributed to Jesus by Matthew's twenty-fourth chapter. But from whence did it come into that chapter? Surely not from the evangehst Matthew, who had already several times defined the mission as re- stricted to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Apart from pre- vious definitions, for him to have inserted it, even as the portion I with its advantages in position over the portion C, would have been to intro- duce a chronological datum that stands opposed to all the other chronology of the discourse. The editorial work of Matthew, as elsewhere exhibited, forbids the assumption of such blindness to open inconsistencies. An examination of the portions B-H in Matthew's twenty-fourth chapter seems to indicate beyond mistake that this constituted the sole original paragraph. He would hardly have left the exhortation in portion H as it there stands if he had added portion I, for it would then involve the endurance of the individual until the gospel had covered "the whole world." It seems difficult to avoid the conclusion that the portion I of FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE I45 Matthew's twenty-fourth chapter was added after that gospel had left Matthew's hands. For the appearance of the verse at that point, there is an adequate explanation: The apparent forecast of the dis- course as a whole was not fulfilled; the Son of man did not come in that generation; the outlook of the society of Jesus as to its mission was broadened; another terminus was sought and found. The gospel of the kingdom must first be given to the whole inhabited earth. Thus this Matthaean verse, subsequently taken up as por- tion C of Mark, had an origin similar to that of another Matthaean verse of equivalent content, Matt. 21:43, also unsupported by docu- ment MK and the Lukan use of document MK.^ It would seem, from the evidence, that the gospel tradition, as examined to the present, contains three strata of thought as to the extent of the mission. There is the hint by Jesus, through parable and saying, that others than those of Israel may have a place in the kingdom of God. This outlook may be adequately exhibited sum- marily by the saying, "Let the children first be filled," document MK7:27. There is the conception of the evangehst Matthew, as representative, it may be supposed, of a section of the early community, to the effect that the mission of Jesus and his followers was for Israel only, gospel MT 15 : 24; 10: 5, 6, 23. There is the view of the later Christian brotherhood that the mission was for the whole world, as expressed impliedly in Matt. 21:43, and explicitly in Matt. 24:14. Whether the latter, that is, an exphcit statement that the mission is defined by the limits of the inhabited earth, is derivable from words of Jesus is a problem for subsequent investigation.^ Within the above paragraph on the persecution of the disciples there are two portions which take their form from the fact that the content, in whole or in part, of the Markan paragraph had already appeared at previous points in the gospels of Luke and Matthew. These portions are the D of gospel LK and the G of gospel MT. Because portion D of document MK had already been inserted by Luke from document P §22 as Luke 12 : 11, 12, he recasts this portion of document MK when he is taking over this paragraph, as is at once evident by a comparison. Because the whole paragraph had once 1 On which, see pp. 88-92. 2 See pp. 342-52. 146 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE been used by Matthew in his tenth chapter, when he is embodying the thirteenth chapter of document MK he uses only, from this para- graph, the opening and closing verses, portions B, F, H. In the place of the rest of the paragraph he substitutes the non-paralleled portion G. As the Lukan D and the Matthaean G are editorial prod- ucts,' originating from causes which we are able clearly to trace, they have a very high critical value. For within them, it is reason- able to expect, there may be found the expression of tendencies which belong to the age from which they come. If so, these may be used as a standard by which to test certain other sayings of hke kind which are elsewhere credited to Jesus. An examination of portion G of Matthew reveals these situations as characterizing the time of that evangehst : A. Defection of disciples under persecution. B. The rise of false prophets. C. The waning of faith in Jesus as Christ. From a comparison of the Lukan portion D with documents MK and P, it will be seen that, instead of regarding the wisdom of dis- ciples under trial as the work of " the Holy Spirit," it is attributed to the supramundane and post-ascension activity of Jesus himself, " I will give you a mouth and wisdom." It represents Jesus, therefore, as placing a large emphasis upon the personal element, upon himself as the center and power, in the future mission. From these two I It is a striking fact that Matthew transposes sayings of Jesus, found by him in his document MK, from the discourse in which they stand in that document, in only five cases; and that, of these five, four are the result of his construction of a single dis- course, namely, that on the mission in his tenth chapter. Thus document MK 9:376 becomes Matt. 10:40; document MK 9:41 becomes Matt. 10:42; the transposition of the former results in the use of document MK 10:15 as Matt. 18:3. The para- graph in document MK 13:9-13 becomes Matt. 10:17-22. The only other instance is the use of a document MK saying in the construction of another discourse, the Sermon on the Mount, where MK 11:25 becomes Matt. 6:14, in order that Matthew may group in this place the whole body of sayings in his documents about prayer. Of these five instances, there is one only that is of such lengdi and so intimately bound up with the discourse in which it stands that the unity and completeness of the discourse is destroyed by its removal, namely, MK 13 : 9-13. Therefore this is the only case in which Matthew, having used a portion once from document MK, feels obligated to repeat enough of it to keep the connection, namely, the beginning and the close of the paragraph. For the rest of it he substitutes related facts from the actual history of the mission. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 147 editorial portions we derive four important phases of the Hfe and thought of the early apostolic age, those mentioned above, and : D. The post-ascension activity of Jesus. A. The influence of the fact of defection under persecution as a feature of the apostolic age has already been traced in its effects upon many passages in the reported teaching of Jesus, perhaps most notably in document MK 8:34 — 9:1.' B. Is the document M addition to the Sermon on the Mount, that is, the assignment of false prophets to a drastic eschatological fate,^ to be attributed to the havoc they wrought in the early community ? Did some member of that community seek to offset their pernicious influence by condemnatory words credited to Jesus ? And were these words wrought into the texture of the close of the Sermon with- out precise regard to context, so that they may now be excised and leave a conclusion of normal content, and parallel to the document G conclusion ? Such seem to be the facts; their explanation appears to be suggested by the history of the apostolic age as reflected in the present Matthaean portion G. A final decision may be deferred till there has been made a complete study of all references to false pyophets in the gospels. ^ C. An examination of the only other passage in which there is the mention of a waning faith in the apostoHc age will be made subse- quently.-* D. The assertion of post-ascension activity by Jesus is credited to him, on behalf of the mission, nowhere in our four great documents G, MK, P, and M. It does appear in a part of Matthew which comes from some other source, Matt. 28:206, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the consummation of the aeon." ^ Another problem of the paragraph on persecution is raised by the difference between the Lukan and the other forms of the portion H. The document MK used by Matthew was evidently, in this portion, precisely the same verbally as the document MK which has come down to us. How explain the Lukan portion H ? Can it be sum- I See pp. 79-82. 2 See pp. 24, 25. 3 See pp. 154-65 and 216-18. 4 See pp. 198, 199. s This passage is considered on pp. 342-52. 148 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE marily dismissed as a rewriting of his document ? Not when there are had in mind the evidences ahready gathered that the Lukan copy of the document MK differed in some passages from that used by ]\Iatthew and that possessed by us, and that the indications, to the present, are that it was a more primitive form of document ]\IK. With this possibihty in mind for this passage also, appeal may be made tentatively to the internal evidence. The meaning of the document MK portion H seems clear. Read in the hght of the preceding saying in MK 13: 7, and the following in MK 13:30, it may be paraphrased interpretatively : "But he that endureth persecutions without defec- tion until after the destruction of Jerusalem, the same shall be saved." Is this the conception of Jesus as to what constitutes the condition and the content of salvation ? Assuredly we may not deny that it is, solely because it differs from present-day definitions of salvation. The salvation here promised is that ushered in by the coming of the Son of man on the clouds while the disciples are still alive. When one turns elsewhere to compare this definition of salvation with those given by Jesus on other occasions, it is found that the present instance stands in isolation. Jesus is reported to have used the word "save (o-co^o))" three times of heahngs for the body.' In another instance it is not clear that there was heahng,^ but what was given was a present possession, and the "saving" a completed fact. The insertion of the word by Luke alone in the exposition of the par- able of the Sower3 exhibits its early currency as a theological term, but separates it from the usage of Jesus in this connection. It is attrib- uted to Jesus once with a very general sense, but indefinite religious content.'* This context supphes the only instance of Jesus' use of the cognate, "salvation (cra)T77/3ia)."s Once only in the Synoptic Gospels does it appear with a meaning somewhat similar to that in the case primarily under consideration, namely, in the unauthentic ]\Iark 16: 16, " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." ■ MK 5:34; 10:52; Luke 17:19. A similar instance in Luke 8:50 is unsup- ported by document MK 5:36. 2 Luke 7:50. 3 Luke 8:i2 = MK 4:15. 4 Luke 19: 10. s Luke 19:9. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE I49 The thoughts in the Lukan report of the saying in portion H are simple, and appropriate to the occasion. " Not a hair of your head shall perish " : that is, in accord with the thought elsewhere expressed,^ nothing shall carry you beyond the bounds of the care and concern of your Father; his solicitude and sympathy will be constant in your future. "In your patience ye shall win your souls": that is, by endurance and steadfastness under persecution you will gain in real life; by the disciphne of hard experiences, even unto bodily death, you will win life itself. If it be asked which form seems secondary and derivative, account must be taken of the probabihty that, given the words from Jesus as expressed in the Lukan portion H, given, with that, the behef in the coming of the Son of man while the disciples were yet ahve, as founded in the rest of the discourse, the tradition would likely take on the form in the document MK portion H sooner or later. Therefore it may, perhaps, be concluded here as elsewhere that Luke's copy of document MK was more primitive than that of Matthew. How far the apparently derivative and secondary record in the present MK portion H is yet the expression of the essential thought of Jesus about salvation can be ultimately determined only by the study of those other sections of this dis- course in which the idea of some consummating event emerges more clearly than in the words "In your patience ye shall win your souls." Of minor significance, but worthy of note, is the modification in the portion F, by which gospel MT (chap. 24) was conformed to the later accretion in portion I through the change of "all men" to "all the nations," By a somewhat similar expedient, the addition of "and to the Gentiles," the Matthaean portion B (chap. 10) was used, without serious modification, by a later editor, as a corrective to the evangehst's thought as expressed in portion I (chap. 10). For an exhibit of the paragraph on persecution, so far as derivable by an appeal to the oldest form of the tradition, there may be used, it would seem, document MK with the omission of portion C and the substitution of the Lukan testimony, as from a more primitive jSIK, for the present MK form of the portion H. I Luke 1 2 -.7= Matt. 10:30. I50 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE §5. The Destruction of Jerusalem Gospel MT 24:15-22 Document MK 13: 14-20 A \Mien therefore ye A But when ye see the see the abomination 01 desolation, which was spoken of by Danid the prophet, standing in the holy place (let him that readeth understand), abomination of desol tion standing where he ought not (let him that readeth understand), Gospel LK 21:20-24 Document P §60 A But when ye see Jeru- salem compassed with armies, C then let them that are in Judsea flee unto the moimtains : D let him that is on the housetop not go down to take out the things that are in his house: E and let him that is in the field not return back to take his doke. C then let them that are in Judsa flee unto the mountains: D and let him that is on the housetop not go down, nor enter in. to take anything out of his house: E and let him that is in the fidd not return back to take his doke. B then know that her desolation is at hand. C Then let them that are in Judxa flee unto the mountains; them that are in the midst of her depart out and let D In that day. he which G But woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days ! H And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on a sabbath: I for then shall be great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be. J .'Vnd except those days had been shortened, no flesh would have been saved: but for the dect's sake those days shall be short- ened. G But woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days ! H -'^nd pray ye that it be not in the winter. I For those davs shall be tribulation, such as there hath not been the like from the beginning of the crea- tion which God created until now, and never shall be. J And except the Lord had shortened the days, no flesh would have been saved : but for the dect's sake, whom he chose, he shortened the days. E and let not them that are in the country enter therein. F For these are days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. G Woe tmto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days ! I for there shall be great distress upon the land, and wrath unto this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: K and Jerusalem shall be trod- den down of the Gen- tiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. ihall be on the house- top, and his goods in the house, let him not go down to take them away : E and let him that is in the field likewise not return back. If an examination be macie of gospel LK, in all those portions that are derived by Luke from the document MK, it will be found that there is no paragraph which Luke has transcribed with so great a modification of the wording of his source as these verses on the destruc- tion of Jerusalem. This most significant fact has its probable expla- nation in the chronological relation between the event here portrayed and the production of the gospel by Luke. To the general fact that FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 151 he was dealing in this discourse with prophetic material, there is, perhaps, to be added the specific recognition that the event here treated had already become history. Under the influence of the known course of events in connection with the Roman siege and capture of the city, Luke recasts the sayings in plain and definite terms. The differences between the evangelist and his source are, with the single exception of the portion J, attributable with reasonable confidence to the fact that he did his work after Jerusalem had fallen. Indications that Luke framed his gospel after the fall of the city may be detected in the rewriting of portion A in plain terms, in the addition of the portion B statement about "her desolation," in the sense that the days of conflict and ruthless aggression by the Romans were "days of vengeance" (F), in the interpretation of the great calamity as after all only the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy (F), in the omission of the suggestion that prayer be made against its coming "in the winter" (H)— without significance now that the event was past. Of even more striking testimony to the late date of the Lukan form, there is the sketch of developments as actually experienced, in the portion I, where Luke has substituted much that is specific for the very general portion I of document MK. And the view of Luke's time as to the period during which the holy city is to be dominated by the Gentiles is set forth in the addition which he makes in the portion K. With Paul, Luke perceives that these times are "the times of the Gentiles," but he shares Paul's faith that there is a future for the Israel now temporarily cast off. Matthew was faithful to his source even in verbal form, his depar- ture consisting in so common a phenomenon as the indication that events are the fulfilment of prophetic scripture (A). In that connec- tion he gives the definite "holy place" for the general "where he ought not" of his source. It may not be argued from Matthew's faithfulness here that he therefore constructed his gospel before the fall of Jerusalem. Whether from Matthew or from another, there is one clear echo from the experiences of the Roman war in the addition to portion H of the words, "neither on a sabbath." Famiharity with Josephus' record of the fatal effects of the sabbath law in the conflict with Rome, through the enforced suspension of all defensive activities on that day, makes this phrase at this place luminous with meaning. 152 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Within document MK itself, as we have it and as it was used by Matthew, there is one indication only that the history as it developed affected the document, namely, that in the portion J. The impression made by this portion in all its parts is that it was added after the events. By its absence from Luke it is made probable that his recension of document MK did not contain this portion, for Luke uses all of the Markan paragraph except H, and makes some additions. Here, as so frequently elsewhere, the testimony points to a more primi- tive MK in the hands of Luke. Apparently Luke's document MK had felt no influence from the actual experiences of the siege; but the document that passed into the hands of Matthew had, it seems, already taken up an accretion in J. It is obvious that the relative dates of the gospels of :Matthew and Luke are not determinable by a knowledge as to which of them used the more primitive document ]\IK. The evangeHsts may have belonged to different regions. To the external testimony offered by the absence of portion J from the gospel LK, there are to be added certain specific internal evidences, not covered by the general fact that the time standpoint of the por- tion J is post eventum. Document jMK credits Jesus with referring to God as "the Lord" — "except the Lord had shortened the days." This seems not to be after the manner of Jesus, for except in passages from the Old Testament, where the exigency of quotation demanded it, Jesus is nowhere else reported to have used "the Lord" as a desig- nation of God. It is one of his notable contributions that he gave eternal currency to another mode of referring to God. By the time of the destruction of Jerusalem it had become customary to denomi- nate the Christian community, actual and prospective, as "the elect." The presence of this phrase in a verse originating after that event is, therefore, natural, if not inevitable, where a collective, designative term is needed. Does that account for its presence in this portion J ? Or is the term to be attributed to Jesus ? It ought to be observed that this idea of election forms the staple of the thought in the document M accretion to the parable of the Great Supper or ]\Iarriage Feast, and is expressly formulated in the closing words, " For many are called, but few elected."' It seems that the external evidence, the time standpoint of the verse as a whole, and the minor but significant I See pp. 29, 30. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 153 internal evidences point to the portion J as absent from the more primitive MK. Attention may now be directed to a part of document MK which, though bearing no indication of having originated subsequent to the events, creates interpretative difficulties as it stands, the portions D and E. In a previous study these portions were under considera- tion, because paralleled in document P.^ Some questions were raised there as illustrative of the very real problems presented to the mind which would deal justly with the thought of D and E in this Markan context. Further study on this paragraph, it will be agreed, tends only to increase the sense of the incongruity of these portions to the scene here depicted. On the other hand, their close verbal relation to the same sayings in the parallel, document P §60, where they are entirely intelHgible, certifies to their genuineness as sayings from Jesus. It ought to be observed that in the preceding portion C flight to the mountains is bidden. Flight is named as the one practi- cable move on the part of the disciples in the presence of impending disaster. But how can one flee who is bidden to remain fixed upon the housetop, or to hold his present place in the field, as against all attempts, by descent or return, to avert the immediate disaster ? And why such extraordinary haste to recognize flight as useless ? A siege is not the work of a moment. It does not come as a flash of hghtning while a man is away from his house in the field, while he strolls or reclines, all unwitting of war, upon the housetop. Flight, as pre- cautionary, permits, by virtue of its motive, action less precipitate than that sketched here. May not a man at least gather clothing and sustenance for support in the mountain fastnesses? If to these questions there be offered the general objection that they fail to take account of oriental hyperbole of expression, and seek to press a literahsm which is Httle to the point, it is to be answered that the evan- gehst Luke did not think so, for he found the sayings so incongruous to the situation depicted here that he rephrased them as practicable injunctions in his portions D and E. The evidence seems to point to the conclusion that there is here another instance of genuine sayings of Jesus which have found their true context in document P but are misplaced in document MK. I See pp. 48, 49. 154 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Since, however, the theme of document P §60 is closely related to the theme of other portions of this Markan discourse, the question naturally emerges again whether P §60 may be regarded as originally spoken as a part of the final discourse on the future. If so, the presence of a part of P §60 as portions D and E of document jMK is simply a displacement of sayings within a discourse, to another part of which they properly belong. For an exhibit of the sayings of Jesus, in the final discourse, as to the destruction of Jerusalem, so far as these are attainable by refer- ence to the document in its more original form, there must be dropped, it appears, from our present document MK the portions D, E, and J, the last because it was added, perhaps, after the event, D and E because they belong elsewhere among the genuine utterances of Jesus. §6. The Rise of Messianic Claimants Gospel MT 24:23 Document MK 13:21 Document P §60 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. Then if any man shall say unto And then if any man shall say And they shall say to you, Lo, you, Lo, here is the Christ, or, unto you, Lo, here is the Christ; there! T-o, here! go not away, nor Here; believe it not. or, Lo, there; believe it not. follow after them: Because the evangehst Luke had already taken up this saying, by his use of the document P, he omitted it when he came upon it in his document MK, in accordance with his most consistently heeded literary principle (Principle 2). By these words with reference to those days of the future when persecution and the distresses of the war with the Romans should press hard upon his disciples, Jesus made it clear to his company that he foresaw the direction in which their hopes would turn, and felt strongly the necessity for vigorous words of warning against the pretensions to the fulfilment of those hopes which would come from the Zealot ranks.' His disciples would long to see one of the days of the Son of man that thereby there might be made an end of their discomforts; messianic movements initiated in those days would profess that the time was at hand for the reahzation of such hopes; to all such seductive appeals the disciples must turn a deaf ear — " ye shall not see it." I See chap. iii. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 155 Interest in the interrogation of history as to how far these forecasts of Jesus were fulfilled is much weakened by the knowledge that he did not speak of phenomena which had no basis in the past and pres- ent, and which were consequently to emerge new and starthng in the future. Jesus did no more than predicate the prolongation of influences and tendencies vigorously at work in his own day. Their interest for him, so far as they would fashion the future, lay in their probable effect upon his own followers in the years immediately succeeding his personal departure. Such forecasts as Jesus made about the future rise of messianic claimants were well within the province of any acute observer of his time." Some brief review of the actual developments has, however, a very genuine interest. We have learned to expect from our source, Josephus, little that will give recognition to the part played by the messianic hope in the great struggle with Rome. But even his fixed purpose to keep this phase of the history in the background fails to suppress clear indications, here and there, of the inner life of the rebellion. It is to the point frequently to recall Josephus' summary statement of the cause of the great war: But what most stirred them up to the war, was an ambiguous oracle that was found also in their sacred writings, that about that time one from their country should become ruler of the world. The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves, and many wise men were thereby deceived in their judgment.^ In the course of his narrative he is unable completely to eliminate specific references. These may profitably be followed in chronological order. That Josephus will not refer to the movements as messianic, nor to the leaders as pretended Messiahs is certain in advance. To do that would be to lay open to his Roman readers the inner religious secret of the revolt from Rome. That he is determined to avoid. Terms of opprobrium, judgments of disfavor and contempt, are necessarily the forms under which our historian will make record of these phenomena. A. D. 45 OR 46. Under Cuspius Fadus Now when Fadus was administrator of Judea, a certain impostor, whose name was Theudas, urged a great part of the people to take their eflfects with them, and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them that he was a prophet, and I Document P ^;i;i. » War, vi, 5, §4. 156 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it: and many were deluded by his words.' This is doubtless the Theudas referred to in Acts 5 : 36 in the speech of GamaKel. Notwithstanding the apparent historical confusion of Acts at this point, it does estabhsh one fact clearly, namely, that, for the writer of this speech by Gamaliel, the movement under Theudas was regarded as a messianic uprising. Herein it is confirmatory of the obvious inference from Josephus. A. D. 47 OR 48. Under Tiberius Alexander Moreover the sons of that Judas of GaHlee were now slain, who caused the people to revolt from the Romans, when Quirinius came to assess the estates of the Jews, as I have shown in a previous book. The names of these sons were James and Simon, and Alexander commanded them to be crucified.^ This is, indeed, a scant notice, and inference must supply what is wanting. It may be assumed with some assurance that they were crucified because of activities and professions similar to those of their father. Judas of GaHlee was the founder of the sect of the Zealots, and, as has been pointed out,^ is classified in Acts with Theudas as one of the claimants to messianic honors. His sons in- herited his ambitions and aims. In this they were regarded as enemies to Roman supremacy, hence were crucified by the procurator. A. D. 52-60. Under Felix Now the affairs of the Jews grew worse and worse continually. For the coimtry was again full of impostors who deluded the multitude. They were deceivers and deluders of the people, and under pretense of divine illumination were for innovations and changes, and prevailed on the multitude to act like mad- men, and urged the multitude to follow them into the wilderness, and went before them into the wilderness, and pretended that they would exhibit manifest wonders and signs, that should be performed by the pro\'idence of God.* This presents a vivid suggestion of the degree in which the messianic element had grown into direct personal claims under extreme apo- calyptic forms by the time of Felix. That these uprisings do not represent simply a handful of rabid fanatics, who bore httle relation to the main movements of the history is made abundantly manifest by the evidences in the following single instance, chosen from many, 1 Antiquities, xx, 5, §i. 3 Chap. iii. 2 Antiquities, xx, 5, §2. 4 Antiquities, xx, 8, §§5, 6; War, ii, 13, §4- FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE I57 and recorded by Josephus as occurring under the procuratorship of Felix: There also came out of Egypt about this time to Jerusalem one that said he was a prophet. He was a cheat and impostor, and yet got credited as a prophet, and came into Judea, and got together thirty thousand deluded men, whom he led round from the wilderness to the ISIount which was called the Mount of Olives, which lay opposite the city at five furlongs distance: for he said he wished to show them from thence, how, at his command, the walls of Jerusalem would fall down.' Felix attacked and dispersed the multitude. The Egyptian escaped and disappeared. His followers believed his deliverance and escape to have been miraculous, and hoped for his return. This hope is reflected in the question directed to Paul by the chief captain at the time of Paul's arrest in the temple.^ A. D. 60-62. Under Porcius Festus And Festus sent forces both of horse and foot to fall upon those that had been seduced by a certain impostor, who promised them deliverance and freedom from the miseries they suffered from, if they would but follow him as far as the wilder- ness. 3 Here, again, we could wish that Josephus had given fuller information. His interest is more in the act of Festus than in the significance of the occasion of the act. But even by his few words the scene and its meaning rise before the mind. It fulfils the forecast of Jesus. " Days will come, when ye shall desire to see " may be compared with "promised them dehverance and freedom from the miseries they suffered from." A. D. 64-66. Under Gessius Florus In the meantime one Manahem, the son of Judas who was called the Galilean, (who was a very cunning sophist, and had formerly reproached the Jews m the days of Quirinius, because after God they were subject to the Romans) took some influential persons with him, and went to Masada, ... and returned with the state of a king to Jerusalem, and became the leader of the sedition, and directed the siege.4 It is the purely regal rather than prophetic phase that Josephus reports in connection with Manahem. It may be that in his case the religious motive receded in favor of a larger emphasis upon the political. But it must be believed that Manahem was a true son of his father, and 1 Antiquities, xx, 8, §6; War, ii, 13, §5. 2 Acts 21:38; compare Eusebius, Hist, eccl., ii, 21. 3 Antiquities, xx, 8, §10. * War, ii, 17, §8. ^ OF TH€ UNIVERSITY OF 158 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE that he gained his large following by an appeal to the rehgious hope. Certain it is that other Jewish leaders, keen for poUtical freedom only, found the movement under Manahem intolerable. Hence the rank and file, persistently faithful to ISIanahem, may be regarded as having placed a special emphasis upon the personal messianic worth of the leader. This is reflected in Josephus' characterization of ]\Ianahem as a "sophist," and in the expected effect of his death upon his body of followers: And when Eleazar and his party fell violently upon him, so did also the rest of the people, and taking up stones to attack him with they threw them at the sophist, for they thought if he were once killed that the entire sedition would fall to the ground. I "Innovation" and "sedition" are favorite words with Josephus in his description of the war against Rome, words calculated to please his Roman readers by the judgment they passed upon the Jewish uprising. His choice of the title "sophist" for Manahem separates him from the average leader in the rebelHon, and places him, we may conclude, in the class of those who won their following by an appeal to a special theor}^ and motive, the messianic claim. A. D. 66-70. Period of the Jewish War Having described the death by fire of six thousand people who had taken to the portico of the outer temple upon the entrance of Titus into Jerusalem, Josephus adds: A false prophet was the cause of these people's destruction, who had made a pubUc proclamation in the citj- that verj' day, that God commanded them to ascend up to the temple, and that they should there receive miraculous signs of their deliverance.^ The promise of "miraculous signs" was a steady accompaniment of prophetic and messianic claims in this troubled period. This indi- vidual instance of the prophet, who was the cause of the death of such a large number in the last days of the attack, was chosen from many of hke kind which Josephus might have cited had he cared to enum- erate. This he makes clear from a summary statement concerning this period: Now many prophets were suborned by the tyrants at this time to impose on the people, who announced to them that they should wait for deliverance from I War, ii, 17, §§8, 9. ' War, vi, 5, §2. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE I59 God, and this was in order to keep them from deserting, and that they might be buoyed up above fear and care by such hopes. Now a man in adversity quickly listens to such comfort; and whenever a deceiver makes him believe that he shall be delivered from the miseries which oppress him, then the sufferer is full of hope. Thus were the miserable people led astray by these deceivers, who falsely said they were sent by God himself; while they did not attend nor give credit to the signs that were so evident and so plainly foretold their future desolation, but like men stupefied, without either eyes to see or mind to consider, did not regard the public intimations that God gave them.' A. D. 73. Month of April The last stronghold of the rebellion to be taken by the Romans was the fortress of Masada. This held out for three years after the fall of Jerusalem, and yielded only after long and persistent attack. It is significant that the commander of Masada was Eleazar, an able man, and a descendant of that Judas who had persuaded no few of the Jews, as I before stated, not to submit to the census, when Quirinius was sent into Judea to take it.^ Thus, the Zealot movement, which sprang up in the youth of Jesus, gave the first and the last resistance to Rome. Eleazar proudly refers to this in the address made to his associates before their voluntary death : We, long ago, my brave friends, resolved never to be slaves to the Romans, nor to any other than to God himself, who alone is the true and just lord of man- kind. We were the very first of all that revolted from them, and we are the last that fight against them. 3 Josephus does not record prophetic or messianic claims as made by Eleazar. If we infer such, it will be on the basis of his inheritance from his kinsmen. Perhaps this is a reasonable inference. Or again, it may be that by the time of the close of this fierce and bitter struggle the religious motive was wholly lost from sight, at least in so far as it took personal forms of expression. Subsequent to the Jewish War : The tendency toward the rise of false claimants, which had held with such vigor during the years between the death of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem, did not exhaust itself in Palestine. Josephus makes record of an uprising of like nature in Cyrene: I PFa^ vi, 5, §§2, 3. a H^ar, vii, 8, §1. 3 W^ar, vii, 8, §6. l6o THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE For one Jonathan, a very vile person, and by trade a weaver, escaped there, and prevailed upon no small number of the poorer sort to give ear to him, and led them into the desert, promising them that he would show them signs and ap- paritions.' This uprising in Cyrene, coming after the destruction of Jerusalem, has bearing upon our present problem only as a testimony to a tend- ency, and as showing the forms of promise which the leaders of that tendency held out to the multitudes. From this survey of the testimony of Josephus for the period from the death of Jesus to the destruction of Jerusalem, we are able to conclude : 1 . That these years were marked by the rise of numerous men who claimed to be the representatives of God with a special mission to solve contemporary problems. 2. That these men did not hesitate to designate themselves as the prophets of God. We cannot affirm from the words of Josephus, in connection with any one of them, that the specific messianic claim was put forward. But knowing his fixed purpose, formed apparently because he MTote for Roman readers, to avoid mention of this phase of his people's hope, and having in mind his summary statement that this particular hope was the sole cause of the war, we may find definite messianic claims in those cases where the details are suitable to such a claim. 3. That these false prophets and false Messiahs obtained large influence over the masses of the people, sometimes numbering personal adherents by the thousands. 4. That their strength lay in their ready promises to alleviate the distressing social, poHtical, or economic conditions which held during the period of the conflict with Rome. 5. That the wilderness was the favorite place of resort for these men when they had gathered a following. In the last months, when flight from the city was impossible because of siege, these false prophets and false Messiahs were most aggressively active within that faction of the besieged which held the inner temple under control. 6. That the methods of alleviation promised by these false proph- ets and false Messiahs were not normal, and did not have their ' War, vii, 11, §1. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE i6l basis in the ordinary processes of nature and of men. They made promise of "manifest wonders and signs," "miraculous signs of deliverance," " signs and apparitions," " signs of freedom." By their word they would divide rivers, and cause massive walls to fall to the ground. 7. That those of these men who were active at the acute crisis of the siege found their strength with the people in the assurance they gave that deliverance from the hands of the Romans would come by the direct intervention of God— "they should wait for dehverance from God." With these resuhs of a study of the forecast by Jesus as to the rise of messianic claimants, and of the records of Josephus as to the his- torical facts about these movements, we may pass to a consideration of certain other words of Jesus on this subject as these stand in this discourse on the future. Gospel MT 24:4, S, 24-28 Document MK 13:5, 6, 22, 23 Gospel LK 21:8 A And Jesus answered and said A And Jesus began to say unto A And he said. Take heed that unto them Take heed that no them, Take heed that no man ye be not led astray: for many man lead^ou astray. For many lead you astray. Many shall shal come m my name, saymg, I shall come in my name, saying. come in my name, saying, 1 am a.m lie; I am the Christ; and shall lead he; and shall lead many astray. ! and. The time is at hand : go ye not after them. many astray. C For there shall arise false C For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and won- shall shew signs and wonders. ders; so as to lead astray, if that they may lead astray, it possible, even the elect. possible, the elect. D Behold, I D But take ye have told vou beforehand. heed: behold, I have told you all things beforehand. E If therefore they shall say unto you. Behold, he is in the wilderness; go not forth: Behold, he is in the inner chambers; believe il not. F For as the lightning cometh forth from the east, and is seen even unto the west; .so shall be the coming of the Son of man. Wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. Of the above exhibit, the portion A is the opening statement of the discourse ; the portions C and D are the continuation of that reference to messianic claimants which has already been examined in part. It is important to observe such changes or additions as were made by the evangelists in taking over the portion A from document MK. Luke adds in portion B a saying of the claimants which may probably be l62 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE regarded as the watchword of these messianic movements, by which they stirred the people and gained their many adherents — "The time is at hand." So thoroughly had it become associated with these messianic movements of the Jewish war, so deeply had it made its impress upon the mind of that generation, that Luke feels no hesitancy, it seems, in supplementing his document by the assertion that Jesus himself did forecast this watchword, and gave it to his disciples as a part of his warning against these uprisings. For the very general "I am he'' of his document, Matthew substitutes the expHcit "I am the Christ." In view of the notable reticence of Jesus, throughout his ministry, as to any announcement or recognition of himself in exphcit terms as the Messiah, it is to be believed that it is not without significance that document MK here represents him as avoiding the term even where it is most difficult for him to do it and make himself understood. The Matthaean substitution has failed to take account of the striking method of Jesus. When it is recalled that in the whole history of his ministry Jesus never takes the initiative in designating himself as the Christ, and that on one or two supreme occasions only does he permit the appellation to be connected with himself,' it will be felt that even this apparently slight interpretative expansion of his document by Matthew gives an unwonted cast to the thought of Jesus. It is significant that a study of the synoptic passages, in which "in my name" (portion A) and Hke phrases occur, reveals the fact that this terminology is generally unsupported either by a comparison of document with document or of gospel with document. To exhibit all the facts here would involve considerable digression, but the appear- ance of the phrase in the document ]M conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount is a part of that apparent accretion; the tendency may be seen further by comparing Luke 21:12 with document MK 13:9, and Matt. 19:29 with document MK 10:29. It appears again in the unauthentic Mark 16:17, ^ testimony to its currency in the apostolic age. May it be that its presence above in portion A is to be attributed to the same tendency, the words of Jesus being simply, "Many shall come, saying, I am he; and shall lead many astray" ? Of the other portions above, it is to be observed that the portion E is the Matthaean rewriting of document P §60 (Luke 17:23), a I MK 8:29; 14:61, 62a. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 163 section which Matthew here begins to distribute in this discourse, as is testified by portion F and beyond, elsewhere exhibited in full.' This rephrasing of Luke 17 : 23 (portion E) is of very great interest and critical importance as showing how the actual development of events affected the terminology of the evangelists in places where, for one reason or another, they were called upon to re\vTite their source. In place of the indefinite "Lo, there! Lo, here!" of Jesus, Matthew substitutes the two places which history showed to be the centers of the activity of the messianic claimants,^ When one comes to the portion C directly from an examination of Josephus, its reading produces one dominant impression, namely, that what is here credited to Jesus as prophecy was actually fulfilled in every particular during the years before a. d. 70. The words of portion C would serve as a compact summary of the references in Josephus that are scattered over many pages. Another impression, almost as notable, is that this portion, by its particularity in prophetic details, stands in marked contrast to the comprehensive but simple forecast in portion A and again in document P §60 (Luke 17:23) = document MK 13: 21 = gospel MT 24:23. This contrast at once suggests the inquiry whether the portion C is the product of the experience of the disciples working upon and elaborating the more simple and suggestive forecast of Jesus. Given that comprehensive but very general forecast, given the actual experience of the years be- fore the destruction of Jerusalem, it would seem difficult for the tradi- tion of this forecast to retain its original, general form. The tendency would be toward precisely such additions as the present portion C contains. The probability of certain additions seems to outweigh the likelihood of accurate and unelaborated transmission. The phenomena of portion E, which we are able to test objectively, witness to the reasonableness of this contention. To these considerations, prompted by the comparison of the accounts, there is to be added the entire absence of the portions C, D, from the Gospel of Luke. It is possible, indeed, to hold that, since Luke omitted document MK 13: 21 because he had used it from docu- ment P §60, he considered portions C and D so evidently an elabora- tion of the thought that he dropped them also. On the other hand, I See pp. 64-67. 2 See point 5 in summary on p. 160. l64 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE it is worth while to take into account, in view of evidence previously accumulated, the consideration that here again Luke's document MK may have been wanting in elaborations which found a place in document MK before it reached Matthew. To the general thought of other portions there is added by portion C the "false prophets." How large a part these played in the early apostolic age is witnessed not only by Josephus but also by certain other passages in the gospels which are traceable to the editorial work of the evangeHsts. "False prophets" are one of those factors in the apostoHc age which are recog- nized and recorded by Matthew in his editorial portion on the persecu- tion of the disciples.' It is the " false prophets" who are the subject of the eschatological addition to the Sermon on the Mount suppUed by document M. In brief, wherever they are mentioned in the gospels the passage is under question for other, weightier reasons. Against the appearance of the plain term of contrast, "false Christs," in this portion C, it is not necessary to do more than recall the objections raised to the Matthaean change in portion A, objections which hold with much greater force against the unmistakable intent of the antithesis in C. The reference to the use of "signs and won- ders" by the false claimants seems to suggest the experiences of the actual history. It is not known that the claimants in the lifetime of Jesus resorted to these expedients, though they may have done so. It will be held in mind that this portion C designation of the early community as "the elect" has already been seen in the document M accretion to the parable of the Great Supper or Marriage Feast, and again in the apparently late addition to the sayings about the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, document MK 13 : 20. It does seem that both the minor and major evidences, internal and external, converge to make it difficult to regard the portion C as a part of the original utterance of Jesus on the rise of messianic claimants. Whether one shall hold that the portion D also is an accretion depends upon one's conception of the prophetic vocation, so far as the test is internal only. The saying seems to make Jesus assume the atti- tude of a confident prognosticator. The disciples are given a " before- hand" intimation of "all things;" they have but to "take heed" at the danger points, and "the end" will be reached in safety. Such ' See pp. 145-47- FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 165 an attitude in Jesus seems like a movement to the lower levels of prophetic activity. The total demand of the evidence brought forward to the present seems to be that within the final discourse there be recognized two references to the rise of messianic claimants. The first appears at the opening of the discourse as document MK 13:5, 6, within which the phrase "in my name" has, perhaps, an origin other than with Jesus. After the forecast of the destruction of Jerusalem these claim- ants are mentioned again, in the terms of document MK 13:21 = document P §60. To the latter there came to be added, at some later time it would seem, the precise and specific terms of the present document MK 13:22, 23. These were taken up by Matthew, and to them he added from document P §60 that which was really the parallel to document MK 13:21. Recognizing this parallehsm, he rewrote P §60 (Luke 17:23) as the above portion E. Luke's only editorial work lay in the addition of the portion B, and in the omis- sion of document MK 13:21 because it had already appeared in his gospel from P §60. §7. Events before the Siege of Jerusalem As the study of the rise of messianic claimants has involved exam- ination of the opening declaration of the discourse, document MK 13 : 5, 6, there may now be considered those sayings which follow this messianic reference and precede the sketch of the persecutions, namely, document MK 13:7, 8 and parallels, which deal with certain external situations that are to develop before the crisis, in the form of the siege of the city of Jerusalem, is itself reached. Gospel MT 24:6-8 Document MK 13:7, 8 Gospel LK 21:9-12 A And ye shall hear of wars and A And when ye shall hear of A And when ye shall hear of rumours of wars: see that ye be wars and rumours of wars, be wars and tumults, be not terri- not troubled: for these things not troubled: these things must fied: for these thmgs must needs must needs come to pass; but needs come to pass; but the end come to pass first; but the end is the end is not yet. is not yet. not immediately. B Then said he unto them, C For nation C For nation shall rise C . Na- shall rise against nation, and against nation, and kingdom tion shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and against kingdom: there shall be kingdom against kmgdom: and there shall be famines and earth- earthquakes in divers places; there shall be great earthquakes, quakes in divers places. there shall be famines: and in divers places famines D But D these all these things are the beginning things are the beginning of of travail. travail. E and pestilences; and there shall be terrors and great signs from heaven. But before all these things, l66 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE \ Of the several events which are set down as preceding the siege of the city, no one is so strikingly dramatic, extraordinary, and super- natural as that which is reported in the portion E, in the words ''there shall be terrors and great signs from heaven." But it seems evident beyond doubt that the portion E was not present in the document MK; it is an obvious addition to what was obtained from that source. From whence did Luke derive the portion E ? Were one to make answer conjecturally, on the basis of the results reached in the exami- nation of previous paragraphs of this discourse, it would be affirmed that this is an addition originating in the course the history actually took; that is, a reflection from experience. But has such a conjecture any basis in the known facts of that period ? Among the facts of primary importance, those having significance enough to be given mention in the prefatory outhne of his history, Josephus names "the signs and wonders that preceded the destruc- tion of Jerusalem."' He makes general mention of them again in the course of his narrative: There were also such omens observed as were understood to be forerunners of evil by such as loved peace, but were interpreted by those that kindled the war so as to suit their inclinations.^ In connection with the arrival of the Idumaeans as alhes of the Zealots he reports: A prodigious storm broke out in the night, and violent winds with very heavy showers of rain, and continuous lightning, and terrible thunderings, and extra- ordinary noises as of the earth shaken by an earthquake. These things were a manifest indication that some destruction was coming upon men, when the system of the world was thus put out of joint, and any one would guess tliat these prodi- gies portended some great calamities.^ But it is when Josephus draws nearer to the close of his history that he brings together, in one showing, that series of events, scattered over some years, to which he referred in his preface. That which prompts him to their enumeration at this point is his desire to set them over against the " signs " which were offered by the false prophets and false Messiahs: Thus were the miserable people led astray by these deceivers, who falsely said that they were sent by God himself; while they did not attend nor give credit to I H^ar, Preface, §11. > TFar, ii, 22, §i. s War, W, 4A5- FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 167 the signs that were so evident and so plainly foretold their future desolation, but like men stupefied, without either eyes to see or mind to consider, did not regard the public intimations that God gave them. Thus there was (i) a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and (2) a comet that continued a whole year. And (3) before the Jews' rebeUion, and before those commotions which preceded the war, when the people were come in great crowds to the feast of Unleavened Bread, on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus, at the ninth hour of the night, so great a light shone round the altar and sanctuary, that it appeared to be bright daylight, and this light lasted for half an hour. This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskilful, but was interpreted by the sacred scribes to portend those events that immediately followed ISIoreover, (4) the eastern gate of the inner temple, which was of brass and exceedingly heavy, and was with diffi- culty shut every evening by twenty men, and rested upon bars covered with iron, and had posts let down ver)' deep into the firm floor, which consisted of one entire stone, was seen to open of its own accord about the sixth hour of the night. .... This also appeared to the ignorant to be a very happy omen, as if God did thereby open to them the gate of happiness; but the men of learning understood by it that the security of their temple was dissolved of its own accord, and that the gate opened for the advantage of their enemies, and they declared that the sign foreshadowed the desolation that was coming upon them. Besides these, (5) a few days after the feast, on the one and twentieth day of the month Artemisius, a certain marvelous and incredible phenomenon appeared. I suppose what I am going to tell would seem a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the sad events that followed it deservdng of such signs. Before sunset chariots were seen in the air, and troops of soldiers in their armor running about among the clouds and besieging cities. Moreover, (6) at the feast which is called Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that first they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a multitude saying, "let us remove hence." But, (7) what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a rustic and one of the people, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very great peace and prosperity, came to that feast wherein it is our custom to make tabernacles to God in the temple, and began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem, and the temple, a voice against bridegrooms and brides, and a voice against the whole people!" This he cried, as he went about by day and by night, in all the streets of the city This cry of his was loudest at the feasts, and he continued repeating it for seven years and five months, without growing hoarse, or being tired therewith, until the very time that he saw his presage fulfilled in earnest Now, if any one consider these things, he will find that God takes care of mankind, and in all ways foreshows our race what is for their safety.' I War, vi, =;, S§.^, a. l68 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE It would seem from the testimony of Josephus that there is abun- dant support for the conjecture that the portion E is based for Luke in the reputed facts of the period preceding the destruction of Jeru- salem. To the statement of his document MK, "there shall be famines," Luke adds in portion E "and pestilences." Famines are usually accompanied by pestilences. Descriptions by Josephus of the famine at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem imply the accompaniment of pestilence;' for example: Now while they were slaying him, Niger prayed that the Romans might be his avengers, and that the Jews might undergo both famine and pestilence in the war, and, besides all that, that they might come to mutual slaughter of one another; all which imprecations God satisfied.^ Because the addition of these events in portion E brought Luke historically to the period of the crisis itself, the portion D of his source is not now appropriate as a conclusion. Moreover, the perse- cutions preceded the destruction of the city, and those "terrors and great signs from heaven" which were associated with the time of the siege followed upon the persecutions. Apparently in order to adjust his paragraph to these facts, now that it has the addition in E, Luke omits the portion D and adds the words necessary for a transition to the statement of persecution, "But before all these things." By them he obtains the true sequence of persecution and the events in portion E. To this addition of E there is probably to be traced the necessity felt for some division in the thought, supplied by Luke through the addition of portion B. For " rumours of wars" in the portion A, Luke substitutes the more definite "tumults," a natural change by one who knows the history of that troubled period. Among the "tumuUs" of those years may be mentioned that at Alexandria, a. d. 38, which gave rise to the complaint against, and deposition of, Flaccus and Philo's work against him, in which the Jews as a nation were the especial objects of persecution; that at Seleucia about the same time, in which more than 50,000 Jews were killed; that at Jamnia, a city on the coast of Judea near Joppa; that at Samaria, a. d. 39 or 40; the disturbance at the Passover, A. D. 49, in which 20,000 Jews perished; the tumult at Caesarea, I War, V, 12, §§3, 4; vi, i, §1; vi, 9, §3. a War, iv, 6, §i. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 169 probably a. d. 59; that at Caesarca again in a. d. 66, in which above 20,000 Jews perished. Many other national " tumults" are recorded by Josephus. In the presence of this turbulent history it is not strange that the injunction "be not troubled" of document MK becomes "be not terrified" with Luke. When it is seen in how large measure within this brief paragraph the actual developments of the history have affected one of the nar- ratives, it may not unreasonably be asked whether any of the events named'by document MK itself have found a place in that document not because a part of the forecast of Jesus but because experienced by the transmitters of the tradition. The external test fails here, except in one particular. Luke in taking up the portion C reports not simply "earthquakes" as in his document, but "great earthquakes." This makes it fairly evident that Palestine, at all times subject to these natural phenomena, suffered especially at some time between the death of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem. This seems, mdeed, to be supported by the statement of Seneca, who records, writing in A. D. 58, How often the cities of Asia, how often the cities of Achaia, have fallen with a quaking' How many towns in Syria, how many in Macedonia, have been swal- lowed down! How often has this destruction desolated Cyprus! How often has Paphos faUen upon itself! Frequently there is reported to us the rum of whole cities. ' By a body of men holding those hopes for the speedy consumma- tion of the aeon that are known to have dominated the early Christian community, these experiences of earthquakes in Syria, and the reports of their frequency in the adjacent countries, could hardly be inter- preted otherwise than as additional portents of the impending crisis, and as such would very probably come to be added to those events actually portrayed by Jesus as preceding the siege of Jerusalem. To this fact is to be attributed, perhaps, the appearance of the words "there shall be earthquakes in divers places" in the document MK. To no other particular of this forecast does the objective testimony call attention. That which document MK otherwise records may be taken, therefore, as the statement of Jesus, heightened perhaps in particulars of phraseology, but yet substantially the thought of I Ep., 91, §9- I70 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Jesus. That thought is very simple, and of the most general char- acter. It asserts that there will be a period of fierce conflict, with all the terrible accompaniments of warfare between resolute and power- ful peoples, before the disciples will see that event about which the conversation opened, the destruction of the capital city. Jesus would correct the natural inference from his first remark to his hearers, namely, that the temple was speedily to be razed. Before that there would be years of severest "travail," which, however, would be only as a "beginning" to the terrors and tortures of the "tribulation" which would be ushered in by the siege. The history of the years A. D. 30 to A. D. 70 more than fulfilled the forecast. §8. The Day of the Son of Man There may be a return now to that point in document MK con- sidered prior to the preceding section, namely, the close of the sayings about the rise of messianic claimants, MK 13:23. To the present, there have been brought under review all parts of the thir- teenth chapter of document MK that precede MK 13 : 24. With the twenty-fourth verse another theme of the discourse begins. Gospel MT 24:29-31 A But immediately, after the tribulation of those days, B the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, D and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: E and then shall ap- pear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, F and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. G And he shall send forth his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Document MK 13:24-27 A But in those days, after that tribulation, B the sun shall be dark- ened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall be falling from heaven, D and the powers that are in the heavens shall be shaken. F And then shall they see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory. G .\nd then shall he send forth the angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. 23-28 B And there shall be'signs in sun and moon and stars; C and upon the earth distress of nations, in perplexity for the roaring of the sea and the billows; men fainting for fear, and for expectation of the things which are coming on the world: D for the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. F And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with p)ower and great glory. H But when these things begin to come to pass, look up, and lift up your heads; because your redemption draweth nigh. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 171 To the total impression made by the scene portrayed in this paragraph, no one portion contributes so much as the portion C. That portion gives the most strikingly dramatic and tragic aspects of the effect of that day upon mankind. By it there is heightened to the point of terrible tension the sense of destiny for man in that impending crisis. It is a picture of a distracted, fear-haunted, terror-driven manldnd. It is vivid with realistic feeling. From whence was it drawn by Luke ? It seems clear that it was not in his document MK. It can hardly be doubted that it is a natural and easy editorial infer- ence from the situation sketched in portion B of his document. That tells of those things which will happen in the heavens. But if the celestial drama is to be so stupendous and awe-inspiring, surely there will be "upon the earth" among mankind some such distress, per- plexity, and fainting for fear and expectation as Luke infers and sets down. The evangelist does not invent a scene; he apparently deduces it from the statements of his document MK. Among the most striking of the several elements which together make so profound an impression, no one which deals with the heavenly phenomena is of more dramatic suggestiveness than that which Mat- thew suppHes in the portion E, "then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven." But like the Lukan contribution in portion C, this particular appears to have been absent from the document MK. From whence, then, did Matthew derive it ? The latter statement, "then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn," may be traced, perhaps, to the description of the day of Jehovah in Zech. 1 2 : 1 1 , 1 2, " In that day there shall be a great mourning .... and the land shall mourn, every tribe apart." The evangelist may have come to regard the sight of the Son of man on the clouds, desci;ibed in his document portion F, as "the sign" which should be seen of all men before the actual descent. Or if, as seems clear from the synoptic testimony elsewhere,^ some "sign" had come to be conceived as a necessary forerunner of the Messiah, Matthew probably felt himself on secure ground in giving it as a part of the messianic programme, of which he had the other features in his document MK. A second Lukan addition to his document MK is found in the hortatory portion H. It seems designed to give support and courage I Document MK 8:11, 12; document P §i6C, K. 172 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE to those who are patiently looking, with oft-deferred hope, for the coming of their redemption, the appearance of the Son of man. Apparently Luke is not concerned to define that redemption in the terms of the portion G, for this he omits. That portion may have been intelHgible with difficulty to him, if he conceived of the mes- sianic rule as destined to be established upon the regenerated earth. He leaves the method and form of the " redemption" to be inferred by his readers; he seems solicitous to assure only that its coming is certain, and that it will be for the joy of the disciple (H), though for the woe of the world (C). In the rewriting of portion B, he gives recognition to the contemporary hope for "signs." That he does not, in taking over portion B, retain the expHcit assertions that the sun will be darkened, and the moon fail, and the stars fall, may, perhaps, be taken as additional evidence that he conceives of the new aeon as spent upon the earth under normal physical conditions, thoroughly regenerated, indeed, but yet so truly normal that there is need of the service of the celestial bodies. The complete omission of the chronological indication in portion A is probably to be attributed to the greater distance in time of Luke from the destruction of Jeru- salem. Had any considerable number of years passed since that event, Luke could hardly use effectively the portion A, which imph- citly appears to make a close sequence of that catastrophe and the appearance of the Son of man. Indeed, Luke goes farther than mere omission of that which seems to have failed of fulfilment; for in the latter part of the verse by which he immediately precedes this para- graph, Luke 21:24, he introduces an entirely new chronological factor, "the times of the Gentiles," which he asserts must "be ful- filled" before Jerusalem is again occupied by its own people. It is obvious, therefore, that he separates the destruction of Jerusalem, "that tribulation" of document MK (A), from the appearance of the Son of man by at least the period of " the times of the Gentiles." The experiences of history have led him, it seems, to modify his docu- ment in more than one particular. In addition to the portion E, which Matthew derived otherwise than from his document MK, he enlarges upon the statements of portion G by the words, "with a great sound of a trumpet." This accretion seems to have come into the record of Matthew from that FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 173 passage in Isaiah where he is describing the assembling of the scattered tribes of Israel in the day of Jehovah, in terms similar, in general, to those used in portion G, among which is this: "And it shall come to pass in that day that a great trumpet shall be blown."' Elsewhere than in these additions, Matthew is faithful to his source, the docu- ment MK. In the presence of such extensive and dramatic additions by the evangelists to their document MK as are shown in the portion C added by Luke, and in the portion E added by Matthew, it seems reasonable, if not imperative, to raise the question whether the docu- ment MK itself is an accurate report of the words on this subject spoken by Jesus. To a decision on that problem, the gospel parallels can give no further help, for they both witness to a document MK substantially such as we have in this paragraph. Since the compari- son of gospel with document yields no more than a possibihty or probability of primal modification in the document MK, and that especially with respect to dramatic details, there is suggested the endeavor to gain further knowledge by the comparison of document with document, a- method which has elsewhere yielded important results. Document MK Document P §6o A The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. B And then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, B And they shall say to you, Lo, there! Lo, here is the Christ; or, Lo, there; believe it not. here! go not away, nor follow after them: C But in those days, after that tribulation, D the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall be falling from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens shall be shaken. E And then shall they see the Son of man E for as coming in clouds with great power and glory. the lightning, when it lighteneth out of the one part under the heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall the Son of man be in his day. F And as it came to pass in the days of Noah, even so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise even as it came to pass in the days of Lot; they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but in the day that I^t went out from Sodom it rained tire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all : after the same manner shall it be in the day that the Son of man is revealed. Isa. 27:12, 174 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE G And let him that is on the housetop not go G I" '^?' ^^V' •?« down, nor enter in, to take anything out of his which shall be on the housetop, and his goods in house- and let him that is in the field not return the house, let him not go down to take them away: back to take his cloke. and let him that is in the field likewise not return back. Remember Lot's wife. H And then shall he send forth the angels, and H I say unto you, In that night there shall be two shall gather together his elect from the four winds, men on one bed; the one shall be taken, and the from the uttermost part of the earth to the utter- other shall be left. There shall be two women most part of heaven. grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. I And they answering say unto him, \\Tiere, Lord? .And he said unto them, \\Tiere the body is, thither will the eagles also be gathered together. That the content of document P §60 bears some original relation to the final discourse of Jesus on the future has been suggested by the evidence, more than once, in preceding studies. It is significant that the portion G does actually appear in the document MK report of the discourse; the fact that it has retained a place there, despite its lack of relation to the immediate context, testifies, it would seem, to its right to be located elsewhere in the same discourse. To this evidence is to be added the closeness of verbal likeness between the portions B of the two documents. Of special significance is the similar sequence of subjects, the rise of messianic claimants being followed by a description of the day of the Son of man in both documents. This agreement in sequence would be notable in any case, but it takes on increased evidential value when it is observed that in document MK the statement about messianic claimants holds a relation to what precedes and to what follows which is intelHgible with difiiculty. Thus the rise of messianic claimants is set in intimate connection with the destruction of Jerusalem by the opening words, "And then if any man, etc." It is followed by the promise of the day as to come "in those days, after that tribulation." Thus the activity of the mes- sianic claimants is set in comparative isolation and within narrow Kmits of time. Indeed, to the chronological outhne of document MK in this discourse, the sayings about the claimants form more or less of an interruption. Their retention here seems to indicate clearly that in the discourse of Jesus they did actually follow upon the words about the destruction of Jerusalem, the difikulty of their interpretation as in document MK being created solely by the "And then" of that docu- ment and the absence of such a transition forecast as is supplied by the portion A of document P. Against the general suggestion that document P §60 is the report FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 175 of a part of the original final discourse, there may not be urged its present position in document P, for it seems to have been established in preceding studies that the document P settings of sayings and order of narratives are not either in intention or in fact strictly historical. To this important general result there is to be added the significant specific fact that an important section of the sayings about persecu- tion in this discourse is actually found at a point in document P much further removed from the period in which they v^ere spoken, docu- ment MK i3:ii=document P §22, their isolated character in docu- ment P making it practically certain that they are not repeated say- ings. That other portions of the same discourse should find reten- tion in other parts of document P is therefore highly probable, espe- cially such vivid and clearly unified sections of the discourse as the present P §60, a portion vv^hich might very easily have an independent history of transmission. There must not be an overemphasis upon the judgment of the evangelist Matthew^, but it is v^orth noting that he believed that not only P §60,' but also other sections of that document might rightly be distributed in this final discourse. He places there the portions P §§60, 28, 29, and the document M equivalents for P §§27, 64. If one does not follow him in his judgments, one is under the exacting and most difficult obligation to show, for instance, what relation the portions P §§27-29 bear to the context or occasion assigned them by document P. While both documents in the above paragraph deal with the same two themes, namely, the rise of messianic claimants and the day of the Son of man, their verbal resemblances are close only in the first of these themes, the portion B, except again in the portion G retained by document MK as part of another paragraph. But while this is true of the wording, there is a substantial agreement in thought in all parts that are parallel. The lengthy portion F, which is omitted by docu- ment MK, has, despite its length, only a single, simple thought, namely, that the day is of such a nature that its coming has no pre- monitory signs; it finds men in the midst of their normal occupations and modes of feeling and life. The portion H of document MK is a fair equivalent for its parallel in document P; and the same may be ' See pp. 64-67. 176 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE said for the two reports of portion E. The whole of the document MK record of the sayings may be regarded as the report from a mind which has retained the substance of the thought but has lost the precise original phrasing of it. If one presses the inquiry as to how the document ]MK report assumed the form of wording which it exhibits, it may be answered that this wording sprang from a reporter whose mind was saturated with the Old Testament descriptions of the Day of Jehovah, descriptions which he has unwittingly assigned to Jesus in the place of the precise phrasing chosen by Jesus for the Day of the Son of man. Thus there may be traced in portion E of document MK the influ- ence of Dan. 7: 13, "I saw in a vision of the night, and lo, there came upon the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man."' The phraseology of the document MK portion H appears more than once in the prophetic descriptions of the Day of Jehovah. It occurs in passages where the assembhng of the scattered tribes of Israel is in the prophet's view. Zechariah represents Jehovah as giving to his people the assurance: "I will gather you together out of the four winds of heaven." =" Moses attaches promises for Israel to his exhorta- tion in behalf of the Law, among which stands this : " If thy dispersed be from one end of heaven to the other end of heaven, from thence will Jehovah gather thee together. "^ To the vision of Isaiah the gathering of the chosen in the day of Jehovah appears in this form of activity by Jehovah: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that Jehovah shall beat off his fruit, from the flood of the River unto the brook of Egypt, and ye shall be garnered one by one, O ye children of Israel. And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great trumpet shall be blown; and they shall come which were ready to perish in the land of Assyria, and they that were outcasts in the land of Eg}'pt ; and they shall worship Jehovah in the holy mountain at Jerusalem."'* It will be agreed that the portions E and H of document MK are much ' 'LXX = "idedipovv if opdiiari ttjs vuktSs, Kal idov iwi {/JLerd, Th.) twv vecpeXuiv rod oipavov ws vlb% dv0pu)irov ijpxero {ipx^p-evos, Th.)." 2 Zech. 2:6, LXX = "^K Tuv recrffdpuv dv^p.wv tov ovpavov a-vvd^ii) v/xas." 3 Deut. 30:4, LXX = "^ai' V ij 5ia(Tiropd " the days of Lot; they ate, they drank, part ot heaven. ^^^^ bought, they sold, they planted, they buiided; but in the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all : after the same manner shall it be in the day that the Son of man is revealed. In that day, he which shall be on the housetop, and his goods in the house, let him not go down to take them away : and let him that is in the field likewise not return back. Remem- ber Lot's wife. I say unto you. In that night there shall be two men on one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. There shall be two women grind- ing together; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. §9. An Interruption by the Disciples And they answering say unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Where the body is, thither will the eagles also be gathered together. §10. Time of Destruction of Jerusalem Now from the fig tree learn her parable: when her branch is now become tender, and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that the summer is nigh; even so ye also, when ye see these things coming to pass, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you. This generation shall not pass away, until all these things be accom- plished. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. §11. Time'^of the Day of the Son of Man But of that day Hor that hour]] knoweth no one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. In the above exhibit there is shown consecutively all of the material in our present document MK 13:1-32, both that which is accepted and that which is not accepted as original. The accepted portions occupy the central of the three columns. To the left there are set those portions of document MK in the place of which other documen- tary testimony is substituted; to the right there are set those portions which are beheved to be additions to the discourse as uttered by Jesus. Within brackets in §§3, 4, n there are placed certain phrases, not conveniently detachable, which also are regarded as accretions. In the central column of §§7-9 the material is drawn from document P §60. In §5 the equivalent of the portion B, which is set aside, is drawn from the Lukan record at that point, Luke 21 : 18, 19. 1 84 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Of the portions of document MK set to the left, the portion C ap- pears later as a part of the document P account of the day of the Son of man in §8; the portion E has substantially a verbal parallel in the document P record of §7. Of the portions of document MK set to the right, the portion F statements are substantially covered by the preceding forecast of document P, itself paralleled by the portion E of document MK, the latter set to the left only because of the purer and better introduced parallel of document P in §7. By this review it will be seen at a glance that the am.ount of the proposed disturbance in the document MK record is not considerable. Additional justification for the proposed reconstruction may be had by bringing into view certain considerations which could not emerge so clearly earlier in the examination. Thus it is possible now to raise the question as to the relative intelhgibility and appropriate- ness of the portion B and the proposed Lukan substitute. If Jesus did not promise that the day of the Son of man would certainly follow upon the destruction of Jerusalem at no great distance, what meaning can there be in the Markan portion B ? "The end " which is referred to there is either the destruction of Jerusalem or the day of the Son of man, probably the latter, though the same phrase from Jesus in §4 does not necessarily mean more than the destruction of Jerusalem. But to whichever event it was appHed by the disciples in portion B, that event brought salvation to him who endured persecution until it came. It will hardly be held that Jesus thought the destruction of Jerusalem the time of salvation; and he would surely not exhort to endurance and define salvation in terms of endurance until the time of an event of which he did not know the time, but which he impliedly, if not explicitly, set beyond that generation. On the other hand, the present Markan portion B is normally explainable, in the light of the hopes of the apostohc age, as a modification of the earher docu- ment MK saying still preserved in Luke. An additional argument for the exclusion of the portion F and the bracketed portion in §3, on the ground of the imphcit claim of Jesus to be the true Christ, may now be seen by a comparison of the Markan portion E with its document P parallel, the former bearing the phrase, " the Christ." It is not without considerable confirmatory significance that in three of the portions which, on wholly independent grounds. FINAL DISCOURSE OF JESUS ON THE FUTURE 185 have been set aside there occurs that striking designation for the com- munity, " the elect," portions D, F, and G, a designation that occurs nowhere else in the discourse. It will be recalled that it is the idea of election which constitutes the eschatological addition to the docu- ment M report of the parable of the Great Supper or Marriage Feast, closing with "for many are called, but few elected." From the evidence of this discourse it seems that there are in the Synoptic Gospels three strata of thought about the time of the day of the Son of man. There is the thought of Jesus that no one but the Father knows the time of that day. There is the thought of the early apostolic age that the day is to follow closely upon the destruction of Jerusalem, recorded in the above portion G of document MK and elsewhere. There is the thought of the later apostolic age that before that day the gospel must be preached in the whole inhabited earth, recorded in the above portion A of document MK and elsewhere. At a previous point it was seen that there are apparently three similar strata concerning the extent of the mission of the disciples, an idea itself determined in large part by chronological considerations. §10. Exhortation in the Final Discourse Gospel MT 24:42 Document MK 13:33-37 Gospel LK 21:34-36 A Take ye heed, watch: for ye A But take heed to yourselves, know not when the time is. B lest haply your hearts be over- charged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come upon all them that dwell on the face of all the earth. C It is as when a man, sojourning in another country, having left his house, and given authority to his servants, to each one his work, commanded also the porter to watch. D Watch therefore: for ye know D Watch therefore: D But watch ye at every season, not on what day your Lord Cometh. E for ye know not when the lord of the house Cometh, whether at even, or at midnight, or at cockcrow- ing, or in the morning; lest com- ing suddenly he find you sleeping. F making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son. of man. G And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch. 1 86 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Nowhere else in the Synoptic Gospels can there be found, in the details of the relation of gospels MT and LK to document MK, such phenomena as are seen in the above important paragraph with which the document MK account of the final discourse closes. Nowhere else, from first to last, do the later evangeUsts treat their source with such striking freedom. Nowhere else is there a twofold paragraph of material, derived from document MK, which clearly holds to the theme of the document yet re-expresses it with so Httle regard to the verbal content of the document. This impression of singularity in the treatment of this hortator>' paragraph by Matthew and Luke is deepened when it is observed with what faithfulness the evangehsts, especially Matthew, have taken over the immediately preceding para- graph on the time of the events. The altogether isolated character of the evangelists' action at this point in the handhng of their docu- ment indicates the need for an especially close scrutiny of their work, with the object of determining, if possible, the active factors in this unusual procedure. The verbal indebtedness of Luke to document MK does not extend much beyond the hortatory w^ords of portions A and D, "Take ye heed," "Watch ye."^ In portion B there is the thought that "that day" will come "suddenly (at<^i^iSioe'l. JTito the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye n.ive me iiu meat ; 1 was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer, saying. Lord, when saw we thee an hun- gred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee ? Then shall he answer them, saying. Verily I say unto you. Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of these least, ye did it not unto me. And these shall go away into eternal punishment : but the righteous into eternal life. Is this portrayal of the day of judgment, and statement of the grounds upon which eternal destiny is determined in that day, the product of the mind of Jesus ? Or is it another one of the products on that subject which apparently issued from the Matthaean circle of thought ? That one should raise the latter question at all seems to 236 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE be forced upon one by the pervasive evidences that substantially every other reference to the day of judgment in the Synoptic Gospels must be referred to the Matthaean tendency working upon the original sayings of Jesus. Is it possible that, in the case of the above para- graph, we have finally reached the authentic words of Jesus on this momentous theme, words from which all the preceding Matthaean accretions have been drawn by inference ? It is hardly so fruitful as is impHed in this suggestion, for many of the notions in those accre- tions cannot be deduced, even by the most liberal interpretation, from the above paragraph. There is no need to suppose that they were so deduced, for they are apparently nothing other than the current notions of the coming judgment, the common property of the dis- ciples of Jesus. Since none of the other documents contains a parallel, in whole or in part, to the above paragraph' from document M, it is not possible to apply the test of comparison of document with document, a mode of correcting the tendencies of document M at so many other points where that document has proved itself a serious modifier or enlarger of the sayings of Jesus. It ought to be observed, however, that this section of document M stands in isolation in that document, that is, it does not find any natural place in the several larger divisions of that document. These larger groups of document M are: the Sermon on the Mount, M §§1-14; the Parables of the Kingdom of Heaven, M §§15-25; the Discourse against the Scribes and Pharisees, M §27. Between the two last, and related to none of the groups, is the section on the Judgment, M §26. Of course, we do not now know the order of the document M as it came to Matthew's hand; it suffices to note that no change of its order as reconstructed establishes the relation of M §26 to any other part of the document. Of course, it may be that Matthevv^ did not use every part of document M, in which case M §26 may have had some natural context in the original documentary con- tent and order. That jM §26 form.cd part of a lengthy discourse on the future, reported by document M, seems excluded by the fact that in his construction of the discourse on that subject in his twenty- fourth and twenty-fifth chapters Matthew has no contributions from document M except two members of the parable group. Matt. 25:1- 30, and the Judgment Scene, Matt. 25:31-46. This points to the THE DAY OF JUDGMENT 237 surmise that the latter always has existed rather as an independent factor, a conjecture sustained by the unity and separate completeness of the thought in the paragraph, completeness except in that it assumes a previous reference to the coming of the Son of man. It reads like a sustained homiletic deduction from certain authentic sayings of Jesus. In the absence of satisfactory external tests of a documentary kind, the attention may be directed to the principal thoughts of the para- graph, in the endeavor to relate them to similar or dissimilar ideas as recorded elsewhere in the gospels. It is held in advance as possible (i) that this paragraph may be the genuine utterance of Jesus, and, as such, the apostolic source of similar ideas elsewhere when those ideas are not supported in their context by comparative study; (2) that it may be from Jesus, but may not be the source of similar ideas elsewhere, those other expressions being also directly from Jesus, the evidence having been wrongly interpreted in preceding studies; (3) that it may not be from Jesus, but may be the product of the same tendency which added similar ideas elsev/here. The thought of the paragraph falls naturally into two general divisions: A. Features of the Judgment Scene. B. The Basis of Destiny in the Judgment. A. FEATURES OF THE JUDGMENT SCENE I. " The Son of man shall come in his glory and all the angels with him." This initial feature of the judgment is portrayed at three other points in the Synoptic Gospels, namely: (i) MK 13:26, 27; (2) MK 14: 62= Matt. 26: 64= Luke 22:69; (3) MK 8:38. But as to (i), the original words of Jesus on this occasion seem to be preserved in document P § 60, and as there recorded are without this feature.' As for (2), the evidence seems to indicate that the original document MK is presen-ed by Luke 22 :69, which does not contain this feature.'' Concerning (3), the saying of Jesus on the subject of denial appears to be found in more primitive form in document P §20 end.^ Ought it to be held that the present paragraph is the source of all these accre- tions ? Or is the saying at this point to be attributed to the same I See pp. I 70-79. " See pp. 83-85. 3 See pp. 79-81. 238 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE tendency which apparently produced those accretions, the eschatolo- gical impulse of the apostolic age ? 2. ^^ He shall sit on the throne of his glory." In addition to its appearance at this point, this phase of the Judg- ment Scene occurs as a part of the Matthaean record of the promise of judicial functions to the Twelve, but not elsewhere. Thus Matthew reports, "when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones" (Matt. 19:28). Though the Lukan enlargement carries in it the latter phrase, "ye shall sit on thrones" (Luke 22:30), it does not so represent the Son of man as judge of men. Since that portion of the Matthaean record is not supported by document MK 10:28-30,' one naturally raises the question whether it may have been drawn from our present paragraph. Or are the phenomena better explained by tracing both of these Matthaean statements to some body of ideas held in common by the apostolic community, but assignable to Jesus only through misinterpretation of the much less personal and much more general portrayal in document P §60 ? 3. ^^ Before him shall he gathered all the nations." Of the references to judgment in the gospels, this is the only one which indicates that the day takes account of other peoples than Israel. By implication, the judicial activities of that dread occasion are fully covered in the assignment by gospel MT and gospel LK, "ye shall sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Does the larger outlook indicate a later origin for this paragraph ? 4. "He shall separate them one from another .... he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left." Apart from any difference of opinion as to the relation between figure and reality in these words, and regarding them simply as a mode of conveying some significant fact as to ultimate destiny, whether is the idea of divergent destiny through a separation better brought to the human consciousness by these words or by those of the same intent credited to Jesus in the second half of document P §60 ? Is it probable that both modes of portrayal originated in the ' See pp. 221-25. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT 239 same mind ? And docs the present sketch show a development beyond even that Old Testament idea of the method of separation which has found a place in MK 13:27 and in Matt. 13 : 41, 49 — separa- tion through the office of the angels ?' If so, is this higher articula- tion another evidence of the later date of this paragraph ? 5. " Then shall the King say unto them . . . .And the King shall answer and say.'" By these words Jesus is represented as designating himself as "the King." Shall it be held that it is from the self-definition here re- corded that there have grown those references to the kingdom of the Son of man which previous studies have shown to be found only in passages under question on wholly other grounds, namely, Matt. 16:28; Luke 22:29, 30; Matt. 13:41?^ Nowhere else than in the present paragraph does Jesus refer to himself as "the King." Such self-estimate, expressed by word, is opposed to the otherwise consistent and intelligible policy of Jesus throughout his ministry. Is the evi- dence strong enough to convince one that he departed from his method in the present case ? Or is the term here, hke the assignment of the kingdom to him in the above passages, to be referred to his interpreters of a later day ? 6. "Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." When there is made a study of the references of Jesus to the king- dom of God, from the standpoint of the phraseology used in defining the mode of its acquisition by the individual, it is found that three passages fall into a group which is sharply differentiated from all others. These sayings are: (i) "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom" (Luke 12:32); (2) "I appoint unto you a kingdom, even as my Father appointed unto me" (Luke 22:29); (3) "Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matt. 25:34). As to (i), the com- parison of the Matthaean P with the Lukan P has shown that the Lukan form of report, P§§25, 26, is due to a modification of the original cast of the document, probably under the influence of the contiguity of the eschatological parables in P §§27-30.^ In the case I See pp. 176, 177. 2 See pp. 233, 234. 3 See pp. 61-63. 240 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE of (2), the words are a part of the promise of judicial functions to the Twelve.' In the face of these facts, ought it to be held with convic- tion that the instance belonging to this paragraph, despite its depar- ture from the customary terminology of Jesus, is nevertheless to be credited to Jesus ? 7. "Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fre which is prepared for the devil and his angels." The notion of an eschatological fate of the type portrayed in these words has been found in six passages in the Gospel of Matthew which, in one connection or another, have been under examination in pre- ceding studies, namely, Matt. 8:12; 13:42; 13:50; 22:13; 24:51; 25 :30. For wholly independent reasons in each case, the conclusion was reached that no one of these passages can justifiably be regarded as spoken by Jesus. ^ Ought it to be held that, though not directly assignable to him, they are indirectly the product of his thought, being the outgrowth of the passage now under consideration ? If so, this single statement in the portrayal has wielded an immense influence upon the sayings of Jesus about the future, as may be seen even more strikingly by a comparison of document MK 9 : 43-49 with document M §5. To bring under review all the traces in the Synoptic Gospels of that mode of thought about the eschatological fate of the wicked which finds its most vivid expression in the present paragraph would be too large a digression at this point. The resuhs of subsequent in- vestigation^ may be anticipated, however, to the extent of affirming that the application of external tests to the reputed sayings brings the conviction that, if Jesus taught the fate here described, this is the only passage by which he did so teach. 8. "And these shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal life." For an impressive and significant exhibit of the accretion of this conception of "eternal punishment" upon the original words of ' Sec pp. 221-25. 2 On Matt. 8:12 = Luke 13:28, see pp. 56, 57; on Matt. 13:42, 50, see pp. 226-35; on Matt. 22:13, see pp. 29, 30; on Matt. 24:51, see p. 55, 56; on Matt. 25:30, see pp 27-29. 3 See pp. 256-67. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT 241 Jesus, there should be set in detailed parallelism with the report handed down by document M §5 that transmitted by document MK 9:43-49.' Shall it be said that the additions in^the latter are the resultant of these words in our present section ? Or are those accretions and this section to be traced to the same influence, namely, to beliefs not expressed by Jesus? The study of Jesus' use of the phrase "eternal hfe" is made subsequently.^ B. THE BASIS OF DESTINY IN THE JUDGMENT It seems a reasonable statement to affirm that all these features of the Judgment Scene are subsidiary to the purpose of defining the basis of destiny in the judgment so vividly as definitely to affect con- duct, as effectively to fashion it according to that basis. To this eminently practical end there is brought into service that framework of future outlook which has engaged our attention to the present. It is of equal if not of greater importance to determine whether the ultimate basis of differentiation between men as here outlined is the product of the mind of Jesus. For, if it is, we have here in small com- pass the thought of Jesus as to what constitutes true discipleship to himself. No word of his can have higher importance than his defini- tion of the conditions of fellowship with him. Do the demands made here accord with those elsewhere attributed to Jesus ? It will probably be agreed by those who have made an independent study of the teaching of Jesus, a study not swayed by preconceptions, that the way to discipleship and ultimate destiny outhned by this paragraph falls, in scope of requirement, far short of the conditions of discipleship as uniformly laid down elsewhere by Jesus. It may not be rephed that we "have here nothing more than partial illustra- tions of certain phases of the fruit of discipleship, for these actions are made the sole basis of destiny; the representation is that nothing else is taken into account. To set forth the requirements for disciple- ship as defined by Jesus in other connections is outside the limits of this work. When it is contended that this paragraph does not adequately cover them, it is not meant that the conduct here sketched is of trivial significance, or so wholly secondary for Jesus as to be unworthy of high recognition. What is advanced is that, while the I See pp. 259-63. 2 See pp. 270-72. 242 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE activities here named fall within the expressions of true discipleship, they entirely miss that which constitutes the essence of disciple- ship. They are the body without the soul ; at the most they represent the lesser half of the way of life. It will be recalled that when Jesus spoke the parable of the Good Samaritan he was not expounding his whole definition of the way "to inherit eternal hfe," but only its other half— "and thy neighbour as thyself." But in the paragraph under consideration the love of neighbor is not the other half but the whole of the basis of destiny. If this mode of view is not elsewhere traceable to Jesus, and is here in a paragraph otherwise doubtful, from whence does it come ? In answer, may it not correctly be said that we possess in this paragraph a summary sketch of the community ethics in the early Christian society as those ethics are known to us from the other literature of the period? Do not these activities constitute the principal forms in which the new moral life of the early church found its first corporate expressions ? Reference is made not to the first years of the apostolic age, but to later decades, which preceded, however, the cessation of growth in the gospel tradition. Back of the question as to the time of origin there Hes the inquiry after the motive of origin. Suppose it be true that the paragraph is the product of the later decades of the early age of the church, why then was it fashioned ? Is not the answer to be found by observing closely the limits of the circle within which these commendable activ- ities are supposed to be practiced, namely, "unto one of these my brethren, these least ones .... unto one of these least ones"? Directly stated, the whole paragraph seems to be a form of appeal for the favorable reception and the benevolent treatment of the itiner- ant propagandists of the faith in the early age of the church. Re- garded as such, it makes luminous the gravest interpretative difii- culties in that chapter of document MK which holds more critical problems than any other portion of that document, namely, MK 9:33-50.' One of the most serious of those problems is created by the repeated phrase, "one of these Httle ones .... one of such little ones." Confusion is caused by applying this phrase to a little child, whereas elsewhere in the context an actual child cannot be meant. ' On the problems of MK 9:33-50, see pp. 67-78. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT 243 Moreover, when applied to the real child, the one saying unmistak- ably so applied is without intelligibility. It was found that if in all cases where the phrase appears it was taken as the equivalent of "one of my disciples" every saying containing the phrase would be wholly intelligible. That it should be so taken is confirmed not only by the internal and external evidences of the Markan occurrences, but also by the present paragraph, where "one of these least' ones" evidently means "one of my disciples," or, as expressly and more personally stated, "one of my brethren." This brings together on a common plane two very closely related, but now widely separated, reputed sayings of Jesus, namely, those about the benevolent treatment of the itinerant propagandists in the present Matthaean paragraph and that one of like intent in the problem chapter of document MK, "And w^hosoever shall give to drink unto one of these httle ones a cup of cold water only, in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward," Matt. io:42 = MK 9:41. Beneath the document MK saying there is evidently the same fundamental ethical conception as underlies this Matthaean paragraph. They are at one both in ulti- mate ground and in purpose. They exalt the benevolent disposition in order to assure a favorable treatment of the propagandists of the faith. Are both or either of them from Jesus ? For the Matthaean paragraph, we are without any ordinary exter- nal test; but not so in the case of the document MK saying. In the study of the most confused section of document MK, it was concluded that the more primitive MK used by the evangehst Luke consisted only of the portions A-I with O,^ and that the portions J, K, M, N were added to the document subsequently, but before it came to the hands of the evangelist Matthew. The true historical setting and the more original form of the sayings in portion M were believed to be found in document M§5. Similarly, the portion K is apparently a frag- ment of sayings that are more adequately transmitted by document P§54. The portion N impresses one as an editorial endeavor to 1 The difference between this and the Markan phrase is only the difference be- tween the positive {fJUKpuv, little) and the superlative (Aax^cTwv, least) of the one word. 2 As exhibited on p. 69-71. 244 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE fashion a form of transit between M and O, necessitated by the intro- duction of M. The portion J has undergone verbal changes, it seems, since document MK was used by Matthew, its more original wording being found in Matt. 10:42. But what shall be said as to the origin of the portion J? Unhke portions K and M, variant reports of it cannot be found in other documents; nor may it be explained, Hke portion N, as a transition. Indeed, one of its most marked char- acteristics is that it has no reasonably assignable relation to what precedes or to what follows; the common element in it and its context is no more than the phrase "one of these little ones. " In view of these externally derived facts, it seems necessary to consider whether it may not be true that this saying in portion J of document MK has some source other than Jesus, let us say the early church, which by this saying and by its equivalent in the present Matthaean paragraph on the Judgment sought to assure for the itinerant propagandists of the faith a favorable reception and chari- table treatment. That neither one is derived from the other seems evident from the total absence of verbal likeness; that both spring from the same view-point seems beyond any doubt. And the indica- tions multiply that this view^-point was that of the early church,' rather than that of Jesus himself. It was said at the outset that the present Matthaean portrayal of Judgment and Basis of Destiny might be, (i) the genuine utterance of Jesus and the source of similar ideas elsewhere which are unsup- ported by comparative study. But those unsupported ideas are found in greater or lesser measure in documents MK and P, and in gospel LK as well as gospel MT. On the other hand, documents ]MK and P and gospel LK report no portions which can be set in verbal parallehsm with this Matthaean paragraph. Stated otherwise, if the content of this ]\Iatthacan paragraph is their source for these ideas, they have failed to embody the source but have retained the products of the source. This is not inconceivable, but it seems highly improb- able. Add to this consideration the fact that all the time indications within and without the paragraph point to a late date, and the sup- position of it as a source for these portions of documents MK and P ' The Third Epistle of John is devoted to the securing of a favorable attitude toward and benevolent treatment of, the propagandists of the faith. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT 245 requires chronological reversions which give denial to the assumption. Much the more normal order is to regard the sayings in document MK 13:26, 27 as the starting-point from which there was adduced the whole of this Matthaean paragraph as a homiletic appeal. A homily based upon some impressive text and framed with some specific pur- pose seems as natural a product of the early years as is an exposition of a parable. In some way the homily ultimately found a place in gospel MT as a part of that discourse on which it seems to be based. It was suggested, (2) that the Matthaean paragraph is from Jesus, but is not the source of similar ideas elsewhere, those other expres- sions being also directly from Jesus, the evidence having been wrongly interpreted in previous studies. But the recapitulation of all the evidence found in those previous studies has brought to light the fact that, almost without exception, it is externally based in a documentary way, and hence cannot be called in question, unless one disputes the testimony of the comparative method, that is, denies documentary bases for the First and Third Gospels. As the other possibility for the origin of the paragraph there was advanced the hypothesis that, (3) it may not be from Jesus, but the product of the same tendency which added similar ideas elsewhere. This seems to be the conclusion demanded by the evidence. But that evidence indicates also that this Matthaean paragraph belongs to another period of the history of the tradition than that which origi- nated similar ideas elsewhere in the gospels. The latter were forma- tive; this is derivative. Early framers of tradition, probably without conscious purpose, supplanted, it seems, the original sayings of Jesus, as reported by document P §60, by the phraseology of document MK 13:24-27; later interpreters and enforcers of tradition apparently deduced from the latter and like passages the framework for such an ethical appeal on behalf of the brethren as is handed down in the present Matthaean paragraph. If these conclusions are correct, then it is to be affirmed, finally, that it is not to Jesus himself but to the Matthaean factors in gospel tradition that there is to be assigned every reference to the Day of Judgment examined in the present chapter, except, it may be, the gos- pel LK promise of Judicial Functions to the Twelve (§4), a promise recorded in both gospel LK and gospel MT. 246 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE §8. The Fate of Certain Cities in the Judgment LuKAN' P §5 Matthaean P A Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto ihee. Beth- A Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee. saida ! Bethsaida ! ^T- ^° J '^ •'i'^ mighty works had been done in B for if the mightv works had been done T>Te and Sidon, which were done in you, they in TjTe and Sidon which were done in you they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth would have repented long ago in sackcloth and and ashes. ashes. ^-T^ J „^owbeit it shall be more tolerable for C Howbeit I say unto you, it shall be more Tyre and bidon in the judgement, than for you. tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judge- ment, than for you. D And thou Capernaum Shalt thou be exalted unto D And thou, Capernaum, shalt heaven ? thou shalt be brought down unto Hades. thou be exalted unto heaven ? thou shalt go down unto Hades: E for if the mighty works had been done in Sodom which were done in thee, it would have remained until this day. F Howbeit I say unto you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgement, than for thee. Evidently the portions E, F are ^Slatthaean editorial expansions upon his document, being the equivalents respectively of portions B, C. The latter having been apphed by his document to Chorazin and Bethsaida, it seemed apparently nothing more than a legitimate and necessary rounding-out and balancing of the sayings to adapt them to Capernaum also. But a close observer v^ill note that the portion D is not the equivalent of portion A; the latter requires something addi- tional, such as is supplied by portions B, C, whereas the portion D is complete in itself. For the present purpose, it is not of much signifi- cance what may be one's decision about the source of portions E, F. The whole paragraph has a place here solely because there appears in portions C, F of the Matthaean P the phrase " the day of judgement." But a comparison with the Lukan P shows that this is the Matthaean expansion of the phrase "the judgement." No doubt Jesus could speak in general terms about "the judgement" without thereby recording himself as possessed by current eschatological conceptions and expectations of "the day of judgement." It will not be denied that he had convictions about differences of destiny for men, and that he spoke of a time w-hen separation would be effected on the basis of judgment as to the ultimate worth of individuals, as in document P §60. Not even so much as that is conveyed by the simple phrase he used here — "the judgement." The interpreter of Jesus must be on his guard against giving to a general term used by Jesus that specific content with which certain circles of thought subsequent to his day used its expansion — "the day of judgement." That the pro- THE DAY OF JUDGMENT ^47 posed distinction is not a modern over-refinement seems evideneed by the fact that the eschatological mind ot Matthew did not find ,ts satisfying expression in the simple phrase suppUed by h,s document, "the judgement," but only through its elaboration into the unmistak- ably eschatological term, " the day ot judgement." That which is said in this paragraph concernmg those cties which had been the centers of Jesus' ministry is affirmed o unrecept.ve cities about to be yisited by the disciples of Jesus on their mission. Document P §4 Document MK 6:ii whatsoever city ye shall enter and A And whatsoever place shall not receive you, and A j^ ^^/^^JJ^o wn ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ they hear you not, as ye go forth thence. > ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ that shake on d anu =0.^, ^ against you: \e dust that is under your feet for a testimony deaveth ^o^o^^^g- ^f^ ^he kingdom of God is unto them. come nigh. C I say unto you, It shall be inore tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city. It may be doubted with good reason whether the portion C is from Tesus Its entire absence from document MK stands against it, hough not as a conclusive argument. But to this externa evidence there is to be added the consideration that such severe condemnation as is implied in the words of C seems to be wanting in warrant when it is recalled that the messengers remained no long time at each city in their rapid itinerary of the provinces. That which might be spoken n criticism of cities in the midst of which Jesus had labored and taught for days, as Capernaum, could hardly be directed with justice agist places touched superficially by his disciples^ It seems more normal and more reasonable to regard the portion C as an extension by the disciples to the unfavorable places visited by them o words specifically used by Jesus, but not intended by hitn as a generahzation for later propagandism. That the specific should become the genera in this case was furthered no doubt by the documentary contiguity of the specific sayings, as both stand in document P §4, S- When the evangelist Matthew made a combination ot all the docu- mentary references to the mission of the disciples in his tenth chapter, he inserted the portion C above as Matt. ,0:15 B"t again his eschatological impulse led him to change " that day" of his document into his customary phrase, " the day of judgement." In one instance only did Matthew take over his document without giving to the refer- ence to "judgement" found in it the eschatological cast, namely, the following passage about Nineveh and Sheba: 248 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Matth.\ean P Lukan P §i6 A The men of Nineveh shall stand up in the A The men of Nineveh shall stand up in the iudKement with this generation, and shall condemn judgement with this generation, and shall con- it- for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; demn it: for they repented at the preaching of and behold, a greater than Jonah is here. Jonah; and behold, a greater than Jonah is here. B The queen of the south shall rise up in the B The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgement with this generation, and shall condemn judgement with the men of tins generation, and It ■ for she came from the ends of the earth to hear shall condemn them : for she came from the ends the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, a greater of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and than Solomon is here. behold, a greater than Solomon is here. There have been brought under review all references to the Day of Judgment, of whatever form or content, that are recorded in the Synoptic Gospels. Stated summarily, the results that seem to have been reached show that none of these statements of judgment are from Jesus, except the sayings about Chorazin and Bethsaida and about the men of Nineveh and the queen of Sheba " in the judgement." Even when taking these over from document P, the evangelist Matthew changed the phrase to " the day of judgement" in the case of Chorazin and Bethsaida. It is apparently to that same Matthaean tendency- using Matthaean in the comprehensive sense of document M, evangel- ist Matthew, and later workers upon the Gospel of Matthew— that there is to be assigned the origin of every other saying or body of sayings about the Judgment, except, perhaps, the promise of Judicial Functions to the Twelve as in gospel LK (§4). CHAPTER VI LIFE AFTER DEATH § I. The Resurrection § 2. The Two Aeons § 3. Hell or Gehenna {yiewa) § 4. Torment and Fire § 5. Hades (?5r;s) § 6. Destruction § 7. The Soul {i^vxr}) and the Spirit (Tri-eO/xa) § 8. Life and Eternal Life (fwi?) § 9. The Eternal Tabernacles §10. Paradise and Glory §11. Heaven §12. The Future in Vague Figures §13. The Narrow and the Shut Door §14. The Passing Away of Heaven and Earth §15. The Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man CHAPTER VI LIFE AFTER DEATH §1. The Resurrection Jesus is reported by the Synoptic Gospels to have referred to the Resurrection on two occasions only in the course of his teaching. Of these, one is a brief assertion in the form of a promise at the close of some admonitions addressed to a Pharisee, document P §430 ; the other is a more fully developed, argumentative statement of the belief and the grounds of the belief of Jesus on this theme, document MK 12:18-27. The latter was called forth by the Sadducean posi- tion on the Pharisaic hope of resurrection : Gospel MT 22:23-32 A On that day there came to him Sadducees, which say that there is no resur- rection: and they asked him, saying, B Master, Moses said. If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed un- to his brother. C Now there were with us seven bre- thren: and the first mar- ried and deceased, land having no seed left his wife unto his brother; in like manner the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. D And after them all the woman died. In the resurrection therefore whose wife shall she be of the seven ? for they all had her. E But Jesus answered and said unto them, F Ye do err, not knowing the scrip- tures, nor the power of God. Document MK 12:18-27 A And there come unto him Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrec- tion; and they asked him, saying, B Master, Moses wrote unto us. If a man's brother die, and leave a wife behind him, and leave no child, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. C There were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed; and the second took her, and died, leaving no seed behind him; and the third likewise: andjthe seven left no seed. D Last of all the woman also died. In the resurrection whose wife shall she be of them ? for the seven had her to wife. E them, F Is it not for this cause that ye err, that ye know not the scriptures, nor the power of (iod ? 251 Jesus said unto Gospel LK 20:27-38 A And there came to him certain of the Sadducees, they which say that there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying, B Master, Moses wrote unto us, that if a man's brother die, having a wife, and he be childless, his brother should take the wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. C There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died childless; and the second; and the third took her; and likewise the seven also left no chil- dren, and died. D Afterward the woman also died. In the resurrection therefore whose wife of them shall she be ? for the seven had her to wife. E And Jesus said unto them. The sons of this world marry, and are given in marriage: but they that are accounted worthy to attain to that world, 252 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE H For in the resurrec- H For H and the resurrec- tion they neither marry, when they shall rise from tion from the dead, neither nor are given in marriage, the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marry, nor are given in marriage marriage; I for neither can they die any more: J but are as angels in J but are as angels J for heaven. in heaven. they are equal unto the angels; K and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. L But as touching L But as touching L But that the the resurrection of the the dead, that they are dead are raised, even dead, have ye not read raised; have ye not read Moses shewed, in //le f/ace that which was spoken in the book of Moses, in concerning the Bush, when unto you by God, saying, Ihe place concerning the he calleth the Lord the I am the God of Abraham , Bush, how God spake God of Abraham, and the and the God of Isaac, and unto him, saying, I am God of Isaac, and the God the God of Jacob ? God the God of .\braham, and of Jacob. Now he is not is not the God of the dead, the God of Isaac, and the the God of the dead, but but of the living. God of Jacob ? He is not of the living: the God of the dead, but of the li\-ing: ye do greatly err. M for all live unto him. The evangelist Matthew follows his document ^IK with notable faithfulness in the above paragraph. The evangehst Luke substitutes the portion G for the portion F of his document, and adds the portions I, K, M. That which Luke did not derive from his document MK is set to the right in the exhibit. The most important of his additions is the thought contained in portion G. By it participation in the resurrection seems limited to "them that are accounted worthy to attain to that aeon and the resurrection from the dead." The portion I is a natural inference from the nature of the resurrection life as defined elsewhere in the paragraph; it is a spirit life, that is, "as angels in heaven." If so, it seems reasonable to conclude that "neither can they die any more." Both of the portions K and G, added by Luke, contain related phraseolog}^, "sons of this aeon .... sons of God .... sons of the resurrection." In previous studies it has been learned that one of the discoverable tendencies in the gospels is that of adding to the documentar}' words of Jesus the notion of the Two Aeons, as Luke has done in the portion G. The apparent limitation of the resurrection to "them that are ac- counted worthy to attain" seems set aside in favor of a larger view by the portion M, "for all live unto him." But the "all" may be intended by the evangelist to refer only to all to whom the God of the patriarchs is truly God. However, both portions G and M lie out- side the document used by Luke, and have an interest only as LIFE AFTER DEATH 253 setting forth certain tendencies in the handhng of the original words of Jesus on this subject, as recorded in document MK. From the document MK record, it seems difficuU to deduce with certainty the thought of Jesus as to the extent of the resurrection, as to whether it is to inchide all men or those only "that are accounted worthy to attain." Of the fact of the resurrection, he was certain; of the nature of the resurrection life, he spoke with sufficient clearness; of its extent, he leaves the inference to be made from the content of his argument for the fact. In the document P reference to the resurrection, the positive declar- ation of its extent does not include more than "the just": Document P §430 And he said to him also that had bidden him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, nor thy kinsmen, nor rich neighbours, lest haply they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, bid the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind: and thou shalt be blessed; because they have not wherewith to recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed in the resurrection of the just. There is no explicit exclusion from the resurrection of others than those meant by "the just," though the use of the narrower phrase, "the resurrection of the just," does suggest that the outlook has definite limitations. For if the mind customarily thought in broader terms, it might be expected to use quahfying words only under the pressure of special conditions; these do not seem to be present in the circumstances of this occasion. No more can be said with assur- ance than that here there is assumed a resurrection of at least "the just." It ought to be observed that the paragraph is complete in sense, and adequate, it seems, to the purpose of the hour, without the closing words, " for thou shalt be recompensed in the resurrection of the just." The necessary balance for the contrast can be fully found in the promise, "and thou shalt be blessed." It does not seem improbable that the second "for thou shalt be" is the endeavor of an interpreter to give specific content to the blessedness promised by Jesus. How- ever, there is no external critical test that may be applied to this case. In the structure of the paragraph, "because they have not ivherewith to recompense thee" seems to be the parallelism to "and a recom- pense be made thee," and as such the natural conclusion of the saying. In any case, the teaching of Jesus on the resurrection, as given in the two passages in which he touches upon that theme, shows that he 254 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE had profound conviction of the fact of resurrection; that he con- ceived of the resurrection hfe as a spirit hfe — "they are as angels;" and that the resurrection state is attained by at least "the just." §2. The Two Aeons That mode of world-view^ to which there is to be attributed the addition of the notion of the Two Aeons as set forth in the Lukan addition G in the first paragraph above on the resurrection has been apparently the cause of other modifications and additions to the original words of Jesus. In a previous study there was brought under review briefly a striking instance in the Gospel of Matthew: Document MK 3:28, 29 Gospel MT 12:31, 32 A Verily I say unto you, All their sins shall be A Therefore I say unto you. Every sin and forgiven unto the sons of men, and their bias- blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the phemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme : blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven, but whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, B but is guilty of an eternal sin. Document P§2i C And every one who shall speak a word against C And whosoever shall speak a word against the the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoso- him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit it ever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall shall not be forgiven. not be forgiven him, D neither in this aeon, nor in that which is to come. The portion D is not derivable, except by inference, from document P §21 which Matthew used in portion C. But as the evangelist was making one of the most skilful and carefully wrought of his many wise combinations of documents in the narrative of which these sayings are a part, and as at this point he has eftected a conflation of closely similar sayings from documents MK and P, it is reasonable to regard the portion D as his rewriting of the Markan portion B. It is in precisely such recastings that there emerges in his work as editor now this and now that phase of his eschatological outlook. How his world-view affected his work in details may be seen more clearly in this case if the portion D be inter])rcted as his equivalent for the portion B, and the comparison be made on the basis of the Greek text.' But the most marked evidence of the Matthaean world-view appears in the repeated use of the technical phrase "the consumma- tion of the aeon." Five times this occurs in the Synoptic Gospels, I See p. 57, n. i. LIFE AFTER DEATH 255 and always in gospel MT. It has been found in the final discourse on the future as the Matthaean addition to the document MK report of the question of the disciples, Matt. 24:3 = MK 13:4. In the expositions of the parables of the Wheat and Tares and the Drag-net this phrase, "the consummation of the aeon," appears three times, Matt. 13:39, 40, 49. But for the rejection of those expositions as from Jesus there were found many external reasons.' Its only other occur- rence is as the closing words of the Great Commission, Matt. 28:20; subsequently some reasons will be advanced for the view that there it is additional to the original utterance of Jesus. ^ If previous and subsequent reasoning on these passages is sound, all these gospel MT uses of the word "aeon," whether alone or as part of the phrase "the consummation of the aeon," are Matthaean in their origin, and hence not representative of the mode of view of Jesus. In all of the Matthaean instances there is betrayed the technical, eschatological emphasis in the term, that special use of it by which a body of related ideas is suggested. These notions are not essen- tially inherent to the word "aeon," and it may be so employed as to carry no more than its customary meaning. It is with this general sense that one has to deal in interpreting the single occurrence of the word in document P, and the two instances of its appearance in docu- ment MK. Thus in document P it emerges as a part of the parable of the Unrighteous Steward : Document P§47 And his lord commended the unrighteous steward because he had done wisely: for the sons of this world (aiuii') are for their own generation wiser than the sons of the light. There is here no contrast of two aeons, but an opposition of "sons of this aeon" against "sons of the light." In an even less degree has the w^ord the technical cast of thought in the document MK exposition of a parable : Document MK 4:18, ig And others are they that are sown among the thorns; these are they that have heard the word, and the cares of the world (aiioi'), and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful. There is not the setting of aeon over against aeon, as in the Mat- thaean passages, but simply the recognition of large time divisions, a present and a future, in the reported promise of Jesus when asked about the rewards of discipleship: I See pp. 226-35. 2 See pp. 342-52. 256 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Document MK 10:29,30 There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel's sake, but he shall receive a hvindredfold now in this time {(caipds) .... and in the age (aiuji') to come eternal life. To summarize: The word occurs in one passage in gospel LK as an editorial addition to document MK material, Luke 20:34, 35 = ]MK 12 : 24, 25. It appears once in document P, P §47, and twice in docu- ment MK, MK 4:19; 10:30, in no case with any evident technical sense. Six times it is present in Matthaean material. Matt. 12:32; 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20, always with a distinctly eschatological cast; five of the six instances are in the phrase "the consummation of the aeon." It seems e\ddenced that only the passages in documents P and MK are from Jesus. §3. Hell or Gehenna {yeewa) The word Hell or Gehenna (yeevva) does not occur in document G. It appears once in document P, P §20. In document MK it is found three times, all within a single paragraph (MK 9:43-47). Five instances of its use are recorded in document M, distributed in four paragraphs w^hich are parts of ^I §§4, 5, 27. The document MK paragraph is another report of the same sayings as are found in docu- ment M §5, and the latter report seems to preserve the true historical setting of these words. If it is correct to regard P § 20 as part of the final discourse on the future, then the sayings about Gehenna belong to three of the longest groups of words from Jesus: The Sermon on the Mount, M§4+M§5 = MK 9:43-47; the Discourse against the Pharisees, M §27; and the Final Discourse on the Future, P §20. As is well knowTi, the word Gehenna {yeevva) is derived uhimately from the Hebrew expression DSH "b, that is, valley of Hinnom. This valley lay to the south and southwest of Jerusalem; and is reputed to have been the depository for the dead bodies of criminals and car- casses of animals and the refuse of the city. In the light of the history of the word and of the place, the sayings of Jesus on the subject may be examined. Document M §4 Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time. Thou shall not kill; and whosoever shall kill .shall be in danger of the judgement: but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgement: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire. The forms of penalty attached to the several expressions of what Jesus regards as in essence the same as murder seem to be in an LIFE AFTER DEATH 257 ascending scale — ^"the judgement .... the council .... the Ge- henna of fire." By "the judgement" is meant the local Jewish court established in every important town, of which mention is made in Deut. 16:18. Josephus says that it consisted of seven persons.' "The council" signifies here the great senate and supreme court of the nation, which was called the Sanhedrin. The offenses mentioned by Jesus do not seem to form a scale with a climax, for the difference between calling a man "Raca" (an expression of contempt) and "Fool" seems not very great; nor is the utterance of either much more criminal than the harboring of inarticulate anger. The move- ment upward in phases of jurisdiction is, therefore, a literary advance, it appears, rather than a necessity of the thought. But there is such a movement, and since the prerogative of "the judgement" was death by the sword, and that of "the council" death by stoning, further degradation than the form of death imposed by the latter must involve additional desecration of the body. Nothing more despicable in this regard can well be imagined than the assign- ment of the body to a place with the carcasses of dead animals in the depository of the city offal, the valley of Hinnom. The right to pro- nounce this dread sentence was reserved, it may be, as the special prerogative of the president of the Sanhedrin, who, according to the testimony of Josephus and the New Testament, w^as the high-priest of the nation. No doubt consignment to Gehenna was confined to those guilty of the most serious offenses. And under the division of jurisdiction between the Romans and the Jews in Palestine in the time of Jesus, the Sanhedrin naturally gave itself more and more to moral and religious prosecution. Apparently it is against rehgio-social acts of criminality in con- nection with their propaganda that Jesus warns his disciples in the final discourse on the future: Document P §20 And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them which kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will warn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath authority to cast into Gehenna; yea, I say unto you. Fear him. By reference to what precedes these words in the instructions, it will be seen that Jesus had just enjoined the disciples to speak subse- quently with unreserved freedom of those truths which he had bidden I Antiquilies, iv, 8, §15; War, ii, 20, §5. 258 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE them to keep during his lifetime as their private possession. The content of those truths was, it seems from previous studies, the state- ment of the messianic vocation of Jesus and "the mystery of the king- dom." Henceforth there is to be "nothing covered up that shall not be revealed, and hid that shall not be known." But this does not involve the entire absence of discretion. While they are not to fear the death of the body at the hands of persecutors, they ought to pursue a course, even in their freedom of speech, which will avoid all unneces- sary precipitation of action by the courts, especially to shun conduct in deed and speech which will make them Hable to the most oppro- brious treatment during and after death. The prerogative of assign- ment to the valley of Hinnom is regarded as lodged in the hands of one man — "him which hath authority to cast into Gehenna." They are to act in the mission with a wisdom which will keep them out of the hands of the high-priest, though violent death in the normal course of the prosecution of their propaganda is not to be feared or shunned. No doubt the above saying of Jesus about Gehenna would become much clearer to the reader of today did we know more precisely the nature of those breaches of Jewish law which were referred to "the council," the Sanhedrin, especially of those to which there was attached the extreme penalty of consignment of the body to Gehenna. In the absence of external testimony there can be conjecture only. It seems probable also that certain phrasing in the report of the saying as above preserved, by which it may have been more or less changed from the form given it by Jesus, are the outcome of that same tendency which is seen at the full in the Matthaean P report of the same saying: Matthaean P §20 And be not afraid of them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Here the words " but are not able to kill the soul " have taken the place of the original "and after that have no more that they can do." Instead of the natural words "Fear him which after he hath killed hath authority to cast into Gehenna," the Matthaean hand has inserted "Fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." These changes give an entirely different content to the thought of the saying. The Matthaean contrast is between "bodv" LIFE AFTER DEATH 259 and "soul;" in the Lukan P the opposition is that of the mere death of the body to its death followed by desecration. There is, it seems, no mention or thought of "the soul" in the Lukan P report. With the Lukan P, the body is to be "cast into Gehenna" — a natural description of the carrying-out of the judicial sentence. But by the Matthaean changes this procedure is supplanted by something of another nature, "to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." In brief, the Matthaean terms, as usual, have carried the whole thought over into the eschatological region. The illuminative phrase of the original, "which after he hath killed hath authority to cast into Ge- henna," is lost in the assignment to the evil one of the power to destroy "the soul." In order to reach the thought of Jesus in this saying, there is need that it be clearly perceived that the original antithesis is apparently not that of "body" and "soul," but of two differing fates for the body. It seems to be again the body, and the body only, that is in the mind of Jesus when he sets one member of the body over against the whole body in his notable saying about the act of adultery through one member, the eye or the hand : Document M §5 Ye have heard that it was said. Thou shall not commit adultery: but I say unto you, that every oiie that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into Gehenna. And if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into Gehenna. The issue that Jesus places before his hearer is the choice between the total loss of that member of the body which leads into the sin of adul- tery with the resultant freedom from adultery on the one hand, and, on the other, the retention of the offending member with consequent indulgence in adultery and the inevitable ultimate degeneracy and ruin of the body through indulgence. This ultimate debihtation and practical dissolution of the body he hkens to that process of corrup- tive decay which was most loathingly brought to the mind by the putrefaction of bodies of criminals and carcasses of animals in the valley of Hinnom. It is better, he urges, to pluck out the eye or cut off the hand than to retain them at the cost of the wreck of the body — a wreck comparable only to that wTought in connection with the casting of the body into the valley of Hinnom. It is not improbable that adultery under certain circumstances, or the social evil in certain 26o THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE forms, was punishable in the time of Jesus by judicial committment of the criminal to the opprobrium of desecration through assignment of the body after death to the valley of Hinnom. Whatever the choice of the individual, it is here the body only that is involved by the words of Jesus; he raises the question as to the wisdom of the sacrifice of "the whole body" when ruthless and imme- diate dealing with "one of the members" will save the whole from desecration. But there is a strong movement away from this forceful, clear, simple, and searching thought in that report of these sayings which has found a place in document MK as below, a movement like that seen in the ^Matthaean account of the document P§20 saying previously examined, that is, an eschatological recasting of the say- ings so that the original sense is wholly obscured : Document M §5 A Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shall not commit adultery: but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. B And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from ftiee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell. C And if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut: it off, and cast it from thee for it is profitable for thee Jhat one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell. Gospel MT 18:8, 9 B And if thine eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is good for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than hanng two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire. C And if thy hand or thy foot causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: it is good for thee to enter into life maimed or halt, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire. Document MK 9:42-48 A And whosoever shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stum- ble, it were better for him if a great millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. B And if thine eye cause thee to stumble, cast it out: it is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell; C And if thy hand cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than hav- ing thy two hands to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire. And if thy foot cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good for thee to enter into life halt, rather than having thy two feet to be cast into hell. D where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. The portion A under document MK will recall the setting given these sayings in that document; and when compared with portion A under document M will give weighty reasons for the conviction that document M, not document MK, has reported these words about eye and hand in their historical context. The evangelist ISIatthew had both documents, and therefore had the sayings before him in two very different connections. He retained them in both, reducing the statement in portion C of document MK by combining "thy hand" LIFE AFTER DEATH 261 with "thy foot." No doubt the attentive reader will be able to trace some possible minor influences of the document M report in the gospel MT transcription of document MK. It ought to be observed that, for purposes of comparison, the document MK and gospel MT order has been conformed above to that of document M, their actual sequence of sayings being A, C, B, D. Except for a single instance, the uniform phrase of document MK and gospel MT is "enter into hfe;" no doubt the "enter into the kingdom of God" of portion B in document MK was originally "enter into hfe;" that seems estabhshed by the testimony of the Matthaean copy of it in portion B of gospel MT. The document MK contrast, followed by gospel MT, is set forth in the opposed fates, "to enter into life" and "to be cast into Gehenna." Gehenna is defined further as "the unquenchable fire" or "the eternal fire," and is described as a place " where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." That is to say, it is an eschatological fate of endless duration; against it there stands by contrast the blessedness of the righteous, to " enter into life." Thus the contrast as set forth in document M has been lost; it is no longer an alternative between "thy right eye" and "thy whole body," but between "enter into life" and "be cast into Gehenna." Instead of two possible fates for the part or the whole of the body in the present life, there has been substituted two possible states of the body, mutilated or unmutilated, in the future life. By some simple and probably unconscious changes in transmission, the saying as pre- served in document MK has departed widely from the original thought of Jesus as recorded in document M. And it is not alone by the transfer of the whole to the future life that the mind of Jesus as expressed in these sayings has been obscured. There is given to the term Gehenna a new content; it becomes "the Gehenna of fire," "the unquenchable fire," "the eternal fire," the place "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." None of these things are said of it in the document M report; there it is simply Gehenna, that is, the valley of Hinnom. It is important to recall at this point the fact that Gehenna is nowhere used in the Old Testa- ment except either in the topographical sense strictly speaking, or in reference to the vallev of Hinnom as the region of idolatrous 262 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE practices and inhuman sacrifices. Nor does it occur in the bibhcal apocryphal Hterature. It emerges first, in the above document MK sense, in apocalytic hterature, the date of which must be con- jectured. The portion D of document MK seems to be a transcrip- tion from Isa. 66:24, which reads in full: "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me : for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched ; and they shall be an abhoring unto all flesh." Since these additions about "fire" have been so freely placed here, Matthew having gone beyond even document MK in the portion B by the change of "into Gehenna" so that his phrase reads "into the Gehenna of fire," the question naturally arises whether in document M §4, previously con- sidered, the saying of Jesus has received an addition in the words, "of fire." There remain for consideration the two appearances of the word Gehenna in document M §27, the report of the discourse against the Pharisees. Of the second of these, that at the close of the discourse, a study has already been made at other points. It has been seen that this eschatological close to the discourse is unsupported by the document P report of the final words of Jesus on this occasion. Instead of consigning the Pharisees to a drastic eschatological fate, as here represented, Jesus seems to have forecast their do^^^lfall with the ruin of the nation, document P§i8B.^ In the former of the instances in this discourse, Matt. 23:15, the phrase, "a son of Ge- henna," in the saying, "Ye make him twofold more a son of Gehenna than yourselves," seems to be a term of opprobrium, which takes its content of contempt from the fact that one condemned to the valley of Hinnom was a social outcast, made one by the nature of the crimes punished by such disposal of the body. In view of the uses to which the valley of Hinnom was put, especially because it was the depository of the bodies of criminals, it is natural to believe that scathing condem- nation found one of its most penetrating thrusts in the application to the Pharisees of the opprobrious title, "son of Gehenna," a term probably current in Jesus' day for precisely such a personal rebuke. Unless the evidence has been ^^Tongly interpreted, the necessary conclusion from the foregoing results is that Jesus never used Gehenna ' See pp. 32-35, 225, 226. LIFE AFTER DEATH 263 in any other sense than the valley of Hinnom, that is, the valley of Hinnom as the depository of the offal of Jerusalem, the carcasses of animals, and the bodies of criminals who by the special nature of their crimes were refused the rites of burial so sacred to the Jews. Wherever Gehenna appears in any other sense in the gospels, most especially where it is conceived of as the place of future and eternal punishment, the comparative study of documents seems to show with clearness that this sense is derived by subsequent modification of the original words of Jesus. §4. Torment and Fire All passages in the Synoptic Gospels in which there appears the notion of Torment and Fire as the portion of the wicked, in the future aeon, have come under examination at one point or another in previous studies. For review, they may be set down together, with references to the places where the full discussions of their original source are to be found. Gospel MT 8:29 What have we to do with thee, thou Son of God ? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? Gospel MT 18:8, 9 It is good for thee to enter into life maimed or halt, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire. ... It is good for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire. Document M §4 Whosoever shall say, Thou III. fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire. Document M §14 Every tree that bringeth not IV. forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Document M §15 As therefore the tares are gathered up and burned with fire; so shall it be in the end of the world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they v. shall gather out of his kingdom all things that cause stumbling, and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into tlie furnace Document MK 3:7 Gospel LK 8:28 What have I to do with thee. What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the Most High Jesus, thou Son of the Most High God ? I adjure thee by God, tor- God ? I beseech thee, torment me ment me not. not. Document MK 9:43-49 It is good for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than having thy two hands to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire It is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. For every one shall be salted with fire. 264 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE of 6re: there shall be the weep- ing and gnashing of teeth. Document M §18 So sh;ill it be in the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from VI. among the righteous, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth. Document M §26 Depart from me, ye cursed, VII. into the eternal fire which is pre- pared for the devil and his angels. It will be observed that all references to "fire" in the Synoptic Gospels are derived from the single document M, except passage II above. The one mention of "Torment," passage I, in which tor- ment is treated as future, through the phrase "before the time," is likewise Matthaean. It is significant that the only passage outside of document M in which the future is treated in terms of "fire" is shown, by the external evidence, to have been added to document MK after the exemplar used by Luke had been copied,^ Thus the document MK form of these sayings stands with the various sayings above from document M as the product of times subsequent to Jesus. Fortunately, in this single instance where the tendency manifests itself in document MK, we are able to correct it by the use of another document, M §5, which apparently has not suffered modi- fication in this body of sayings. I. We are not dealing here with words attributed to Jesus, but with those reputed to have come from a demon. Their significance for the present study, therefore, lies in the fact that they exhibit the Matthaean eschatological conception by the addition "before the time." He beheves in a future for demons, in which they will suffer torment, and reports the demon as asking for release from torment until that aeon of torment has come.'' II. The method of Matthew in his use of this passage from docu- ment MK, and the departures of the MK report from the original form in document M §5, by which the element "fire" has been given so large a place, have been considered. ^ The origin of the last sentence under document MK, "For every one shall be salted with fire," was suggested in the study of this problem chapter of document MK.4 ' See pp. 67-78. 3 See pp. 259-63. 2 See pp. 87, 88. 4 See pp. 67-78. LIFE AFTER DEATH 265 III. It was not possible to apply any external test to this passage, as it is recorded in no other document. In the light of the whole paragraph of which it is a part, it seems notably clear that the valley of Hinnom is meant. The conjecture was made that "of fire" originated as did the same words in the passage under II.' IV. This saying is one part of the addition in document M to the report of the Sermon on the Mount. =* The words here are probably traceable to the influence of the phraseology of John the Baptist, document G §iB end. V. It will be recalled that the presence of the word "fire" was not brought forward among the considerations advanced against regard- ing this exposition of the parable of the Wheat and Tares as being from Jesus.3 VI. That this exposition was traced in a previous study to some source other than Jesus was not determined in any degree by the fact that it speaks of an eschatological fate in terms of "fire."^ VII. It ought to be observed that the conception in this passage from the Judgment Scene of document M § 26^ is precisely that set forth by the Matthaean addition to his document MK in passage I above, namely, that there is for the demons, " the devil and his angels," a "torment" in the form of "the eternal fire." Apparently the evidence requires that it be held that Jesus himself never referred to "torment" or "fire" as the form of future fate for the unrighteous. 5 It seems worth while to consider whether the fact that when all passages using the w^ord " fire" are brought together they are found to have been called in question previously on grounds wholly apart from the presence of this word ought to be taken as one more attested portion of a cumulative evidence that the judgments already formed on each one of these passages are correct. §5. Hades (aS?;?) The word "Hades" is credited to Jesus three times in the Synoptic Gospels. It occurs twice in document P, P §§5, 53; the other in- stance is in gospel MT 16:18, where it is unsupported by document 1 See p. 262. 3 See pp. 226-35. 2 See pp. 216-18. 4 See pp. 235-45. 5 There is yet to be considered, however, the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, on which see pp. 294-98. 266 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE ]MK which Matthew is using for this paragraph of his gospel. It is not important to determine, in this connection/ the source of the additions to document MK made by Matthew in 16:17-19, for the phrase he there uses, " the gates of Hades," does not refer to Hades as the future abode of the righteous or unrighteous, but is part of a mode of conveying the idea of violent and malignant opposition: Gospel MT i6:i8 And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. Similarly, in document P § 5 the word Hades does not convey teaching of Jesus about the future state of mankind; it is simply a phrase of contrast : Document P §5 And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted unto heaven ? thou shall be brought down unto Hades. Here the word "heaven" is an equivalent for the uppermost position; "Hades" is that which is nethermost. Capernaum will not proudly exalt herself or be exalted; she will be laid low, will be brought to the dust. One only of the three instances of Jesus' use of "Hades" exhibits the term with a meaning which demands attention in a study of Jesus' thought as to the future of mankind, that in Document P §53 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and that he was carried away by the angels into Abraham's bosom; and the rich man also died, and was buried, And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. This is part of a parable which is so important as to demand independ- ent complete study. It contains many other phases of thought about the future.^' §6. Destruction Document M §13 Enter ye in by the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many be they that enter in thereby. For narrow is the gate, and straitened the way, that leadeth unto life, and few be they that find it. By this saying Jesus sets in contrast two fates in the future, fates determined by the way chosen by the individual. As the antithesis to "life (?a>»7)," he puts forward "destruction (aTrwXeia)." The latter word is recorded nowhere else. In one or two passages where the verb form (ctTroWvfiL) is attrib- uted to Jesus, the content of the thought conveyed is such that there is in it an outlook toward the future. Such is the case in I See pp. 329-32. ' See pp. 294-98. LIFE AFTER DEATH 267 Matthaean P §20 And be not afraid of them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul : but rather fear him which is able to destroy (an-oAeVat) both soul and body in Gehenna. But, as has been seen, the more original form of the saying, as in Lukan P§2o, is without the word "destroy," and seems to have reference not to the fate of the "soul" in the future, but to that of the body in the present.' In one other passage it may be held that the intended reference is to the future when cnroWv/jLL is used. This is in Gospel MT 18:14 _ _ Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish (oTrdArjTai). But this is an application of the parable of the Lost Sheep which differs much from that found in document P, where this parable is placed in what is apparently its more original historical context. Both parable and inference from parable are part of the complex problem presented by Matthew's eighteenth chapter.^ Both seem to have been added by another hand subsequent to the framing of the gospel by the evangelist Matthew. No assured inference bearing upon the future may be drawn, therefore, from the two passages containing airoWvfii; but the thought of Jesus in the "a-TrcoXeta" of document M §13 seems clear and strong. §7. The Soul (■^vxv) and the Sphiit (pTveufxa) Among the several passages in the Synoptic Gospels in which Jesus is credited with the word "soul" or "life," that is, "^vxv, there is one only in which the word is so used that it has undoubtedly a future reference. This, therefore, is the only passage which properly belongs to the present study: Matthaean P §20 And be not afraid of them which kill the body, but are notable to kill the soul : but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna. Even this single use of "soul (^/^i^x^)" with a future content is excluded, however, by the evidence that its appearance here is the result of Matthaean tendency, the original thought not extending into the region of eschatological fate. What Jesus said seems more accurately set forth by Lukan P §20 Be not afraid of them which kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will warn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath authority to cast into Gehenna. I See pp. 257-59. 2 See pp. 67-78. 268 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE It seems fair to suggest that, since no other passage is found with the word "soul {irvxvy in a future sense, this fact ought to be retroact- ive, that is, to be added to the evidences previously advanced that in this passage the Lukan P is the more original, and that the Lukan P refers to two fates for the body in the present.' Though this is the only passage where "soul iirvxv)'' is given a definite outlook toward the future, it is instructive to consider briefly certain passages which set forth with clearness the essential content of the word for Jesus. This appears in Document P §24 Therefore I say unto you. Be not anxious for your life {.^i>vxr|), what ye shall eat, or what ye shall dr'vak; nor yet for your body, what ye shaU put on. Is not the life {« God. Thou good, save one, «'<■» God. Thou is good: but if thou wouldest enter knowest the commandments. knowest the commandments, into life, keep the commandments. I Document P §10. LIFE AFTER DEATH 271 The use of " enter into life," aside from the above Matthaean addition, is found in document MK 9:43-47. But, as has been determined by a preceding comparative study,' the original form of these sayings about the right eye and the right hand is found in document M §5, from which the phrase "enter into life" is entirely absent. That the phrase occurs nowhere else, except in the above Matthaean addition to document MK, may fairly be taken as one additional minor factor in the cumulative evidence that the document M §5 report of the sayings about eye and hand is the more original. Another phrase bearing the word "life (^(o^) " was used on several occasions by the interrogators of Jesus, namely, "eternal life." To Jesus himself the phrase is attributed in two passages only, one in document MK, one in document M. That in document M appears in the Judgment Scene portrayal in M §26 : "And these shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal hfe." That in document MK stands as the conclusion to the conversation begun by the question of the rich young ruler: "Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life ? The words of Jesus are : " There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands .... but he shall receive a hundred- fold now in this time .... and in the age to come eternal hfe." That the choice of the phrase "eternal hfe" in this statement by Jesus results from the form of question put to him at the beginning of the conversation seems suggested by the fact that in the main course of the discussion Jesus employs only his customary designation of present and absolute blessedness, that is, "to enter into the kingdom of God."^ Since the above document M instance of "eternal life" is part of a paragraph against which there are many evidences, ^ and since Jesus apparently takes the phrase in document MK from his questioner, it can hardly be held that this form of phraseology is revelatory of the mode of view of Jesus. To summarize the above results: The phrase "to enter into hfe" occurs only in passages which are shown, by the comparison of docu- ment with gospel or document with document, to be modifications of the words of Jesus. The phrase " eternal hfe " appears in one passage where its use by Jesus was probably prompted by the form of question ' See pp. 259-63. 2 Document MK 10: 17-31. 3 See pp. 235-45. 272 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE addressed to him.' The verb "to Hve (^a&j) " appears in one say- ing which also was the result of a similar question about "eternal life."^ The single, unmodified word "hfe (Cf*>^)" occurs in two passages, once with a reference solely to the present,^ once with a clear future, and possibly also present, meaning.^ It will be realized, therefore, that, as a term to cover the conception of future destiny, the word had, at the most, an inconsiderable place in the mode of expression of Jesus. §9. The Eternal Tabernacles Within one of the parables there is imbedded a reference of the most general kind to the future. It is a part of the parable of the Unrighteous Steward recorded in Document P §47 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness; that when it shall faU, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles. The particular phrase here chosen by Jesus to cover the general con- ception of something lying beyond the present was suggested appar- ently by the necessities of the case. For, having started with the idea of a steward seeking some procedure by which he might retain the favor of his lord's debtors, especially so "that they might receive him into their houses," Jesus naturally set forth the eternal reality which corresponds to this human hospitality in an expression of similar form. This he did by setting over against "their houses" the phrase "the eternal tabernacles," his parallelism standing thus: "that they may receive me into their houses" "that they may receive me into the eternal tabernacles." There is derivable from this particular phrase, therefore, nothing other than the general conception, involved in many other sayings of Jesus, that there is possible a future of indefinite duration for man. Neither its place nor its form is defined in this passage. §10. Paradise and Glory Among the sundry references to the future credited to Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels, there are two brief sayings which deal with the future of Jesus himself. Each of them brings into view a new mode ' Document MK 10:30. 3 Document P §23. » Document P §10. 4 Document M §13. LIFE AFTER DEATH 273 of conceiving his life beyond his earthly career. One of them is said to have been spoken on the cross: Today shall thou be with me in Paradise (gospel LK 23:43). The other belongs to the post-resurrection period: Behoved it not the Christ to suflFer these things, and to enter into his glory (gospel LK 24 : 26) ? It will be observed that both sayings are in passages peculiar to the Lukan passion and post-resurrection history. Gospel MT 27:44 Document MK 15:32 Gospel LK 23:39-43 A And the robbers also that A And they that were crucified A And of one the malefactors were crucified with him cast upon with him reproached him. which were hanged railed on him the same reproach. him, saying, Art not thou the Christ? save thyself and us. B But the other answered, and rebuking him said. Dost thou not even fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation ? And we indeed jusdy; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said, Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom. And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee. To-day shalt thou be with , with me in Paradise. To that attitude of both malefactors reported by document MK, an attitude consistent with the trend of popular feeling at that hour, the Lukan report takes exception, by recording that it was quite other- wise with one of them. He credits one of them with expressing an estimate of Jesus which surely was held by very few men, and these few were among those of finer moral and religious discernment. In the portion B, Luke makes record of more than one particular which creates difficulty to the historical interpreter. Perhaps most prominent among these is the request of the male- factor: "Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom." Such a request presupposes several beliefs of a most fundamental nature: (i) It involves the faith that Jesus is the Christ. (2) By its utterance under these circumstances, it eliminates the supposition of any temporary shadowing of that faith by the apparent denial of messiahship involved in death on the cross. (3) In it there is bound up the belief that Jesus was to come again, at which time, and then alone, he could be truly said to come "in his kingdom" or "into his kingdom." Stated otherwise, within this short sentence there is involved a complete messianic programme (i) of a kind unknown 274 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE before Jesus, (2) not outlined in public by him even though the records be taken as they stand, but spoken, if at all, only to his own circle of disciples, (3) not apprehended, even if spoken, by those disciples dur- ing his lifetime with any such clearness as is credited to this man who during the days in which Jesus is reputed to have revealed his coming again had languished in prison beyond the reach of Jesus' voice, (4) not spoken even to them if the evidence has been correctly inter- preted in preceding studies. Though it be assumed that Jesus taught his second coming, it is to be held that none of his disciples saw in his death anything other than the absolute denial of his messianic worth, and that, therefore, this malefactor stood alone among men in regarding, in this dread hour, the death of Jesus as a stage in the movement toward his king- dom. In other words, one of the robbers (i) thoroughly knew the supreme moral blamelessness of Jesus — ''this man hath done nothing amiss," (2) had a full knowledge of reputed words (thirteenth chapter of document ]MK) spoken to the Twelve or perhaps to four only of the disciples (MK 13:3), and (3) had so estimated the significance of Jesus' life, so interpreted the bearings of his words, so harmonized new and stubborn facts with inherited expectations, so unified the past, present, and future of the career of Jesus, and so overreached the most intimate disciples in outlook and insight, that to him the crucifixion of the Christ was a mere incident in his progress toward the sure goal of his imminent kingdom, participation in which he desired and requested in that hour when all others saw naught but the inglorious close to either an infamous or a disappointing career. Surely it is not arbitrary to conclude that such a request from such a one in such an hour addressed to a Christ apparently so inglorious is historically and psychologically highly improbable, is from every standpoint anachronistic in the last degree. In support of the contention that such a request would place the malefactor in a class by himself, as the single individual who retained faith in Jesus as the Christ and clearly foresaw and looked forward to the kingdom of power which should emerge from the present obscur- ation, no better evidence can be adduced than that body of tradition as to the apologetic activity of Jesus in the post-resurrection period of which the second saying, "Behoved it not the Christ to suffer LIFE AFTER DEATH 275 these things, and to enter into his glory?," forms the central idea. It is the synoptic representation that hope and faith in Jesus went out for his disciples with his death. That dire event shook the founda- tions of the faith that he was the Christ ; it dissipated the hope that he was the one set for the redemption of Israel. The remnant of valuation lay in a backward look — "we hoped that it was he which should redeem Israel." It ought to be added that the apologetic vindication of Jesus' death by the Twelve from Old Testament Scrip- ture followed upon the fundamental conviction that he had risen from the dead; while for the malefactor there was no such removal of the sting of Jesus' death, by which removal alone he could estimate rightly the apparent stigma of crucifixion. If these considerations seem vaHd, it will be concluded that the single instance of reference by Jesus to "Paradise" as a place of abode for the righteous dead ought not to be regarded as other than a later addition to the record taken by Luke from document MK. The second passage, " Behoved it not the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into his glory ?," is an integral part of the Lukan record of the post-resurrection apologetic activity of Jesus. It cannot be con- sidered adequately without the complete study of the nature of that activity as a whole, and the examination of the attitude of Jesus throughout his ministry toward the forecasts of the Old Testament. These studies require and receive independent attention at a subse- quent point in the present work.' §11. Heaven In the usage of Jesus, one of the senses in which he employed "heaven" was as the counterpart of the earth, heaven and earth con- stituting the natural universe. Such is the apparent meaning in the following sayings : Document P §51 Document M §3 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one than for one tittle of the law to fall. tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till iill things be accomplished. Document MK 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. Heaven stood for Jesus as the upper position in the whole, while earth was the nether. Hence, when a vivid antithesis was desired for the nethermost regions, the word "heaven" was chosen: I See pp. 342-52. 276 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Document P §5 And thou, Capernaum, shalt ihou be exalted unto heaven ? thou shalt be brought down unto Hades. Over both parts of this twofold universe of nature, Jesus conceived God to dominate : Document P §8 I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth. Jesus teaches that God is lord of heaven and earth, that is, rules as master of all the universe, not only by direct assertion as above, but by his figurative conception of both parts as under his service: Document M §6 Swear not at all; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet. Document M §27 And he that sweareth by the heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon As opposed to the earth, which is the home of man, Jesus talks of the heaven as the natural sphere of the birds : Document P §2 The foxes have holes, and the birds of the heaven have nests. Matthaz.^n P §24 Behold the birds of the heaven, that they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns. Document MK §23 Document P §3 7 When it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh And it grew, and became a tree; and the birds greater than ail the herbs and putteth out great of the heaven lodged m the branches thereof, branches; so that the birds of the heaven can lodge under the shadow thereof. Upon the face of the heaven men look for the forecasts of the weather : MaTTHAEAN P §33 LUKAN P §33 When it is evening, ye sav, // will he fair weather: When ye see a cloud rising in the west, straight- for the heaven is red. And in the morning, // will way ye say. There cometh a shower; and so it be foul weather to-day: for the heaven is red and cometh to pass. And when ye see a south wind lowring. Ye know how to discern the face of the blowing, ye say. There will be a scorching heat; heaven; but ye cannot dwern the signs of the times. and it cometh to pass. Ye hypocrites, ye know how to interpret the face of the earth and the hea- ven; but how is it that ye know not how to inter- pret this time ? But the heaven is more than an indicator of the meteorological con- ditions which may be expected. From it Hghtning shoots forth, and rain pours down. Across its face the flash travels; when it is shut up there is drought : Document P §60 As the lightning, when it lighteneth out of the one part under the heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so sliall the Son of man be in his day. Document P §7 I beheld Satan fallen, as lightning from heaven. Document G §6B There were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when there came a great famine over all the land. LIFE AFTER DEATH 277 Following the tradition of the sacred Scriptures, Jesus cites the story of the occasion upon which the heaven gave forth the very opposite of beneticent water : Document P §60 In the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Following that usage of his people which originated in the desire to avoid the pronunciation of the divine name, Jesus now and then places "heaven" where Jehovah or God would be more precise. Thus he represents the prodigal son as resolving to say, and later as saving : Document P§46D Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight. Similarly, the exact meaning and the more direct antithesis would be secured were "God" substituted for "heaven" in the following: Document MK 11:30 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men? answer me. No doubt the choice of "heaven" as the substitute for the sacred name by the Jews had its basis in some conception by which God was given a localization in the upper regions. Probably out of this conception grew the custom of prayer with the face turned upward, an established attitude to which Jesus gives passing recognition when he says of the publican: Document P §62 But the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote his breast. When there is set over against these numerous and varied uses of "heaven," as the complement to the earth in a universal whole, those passages which employ the term in another sense, the sense of supra- mundane with a meaning other than simply above the earth, the sparseness of the latter references is made manifest and striking. Among them are one or two which represent heaven as the abiding- place of angels : Document MK 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as angels in heaven. Document MK 13:32 But of that day or that hour knoweth no one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Of an altogether exceptional content is the suggestion conveyed by the word in one of the phrases which Matthew records as a part of the prayer which Jesus taught his disciples: Matthaean P §13 Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth. 278 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Such a request is based on the conception that within heaven there are resident vohtional beings Hving under the dominance of the will of God as Lord. The sayings which speak of "angels in heaven" provide the mind with a certain definite body of wiUing subjects of God in the supramundane world. But it may hardly be held that, even with the union of ideas thus effected by the conjunction of these three passages of exceptional content, there emerges any committal of Jesus to an elaborate and articulated other- world view.' When, however, one passes from the mention of subjects or sen-- ants in that "heaven" where the will of God is done to those refer- ences which relate to him whose will is there supreme, these are so frequent that there can be apparently no mistaking the intention of Jesus to make " heaven" the essential center of God's influence. The mode of designation for God most frequently upon the lips of Jesus is "Father," and this is united with the phrase "which is in heaven" in the combinations "your Father which is in heaven," "my Father which is in heaven," "our Father which is in heaven." The Synop- tic Gospels contain fifteen instances of such locating of God in " heaven" by Jesus. Moreover, the related word "heavenly (ovpdmo^) " is employed by Jesus seven times, always in the phrase "heavenly Father." To the support of the view that Jesus thought of God as the Father in "heaven," twenty-two passages may, therefore, be brought forward. Upon an examination of these twenty-two passages, one is imme- diately impressed by the fact that with two exceptions they are re- corded only in the Matthaean gospel. ' This suggests the inquiry whether this form of phrasing may not be another of those character- istic modes of thought which have been stamped upon the Gospel of Matthew by that circle which formed the medium of transmission for this particular Hne of tradition. Obviously, such an inquiry must make, as its first stage of investigation, an exhibit of these ]\Iat- thaean sayings in parallelism with those of like general content from the other Synoptists. I Consideration ought to be given also to the fact that the petition, "Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth," is not reported by the Lukan P §13 as an original part of the prayer. » Passages which use "Father in heaven" are Matt. 5:16, 45; 6:1, q; 7:11, 21; 10:32, 33; 12:50; 16:17; 18:10, 14, 19; MK 11:25; Luke 11:13. Those which contain "heavenly Father" are Matt. 5:48; 6:14,26,32; 15:13; 18:35; 23:9. LIFE AFTER DEATH 279 Document M §8 Love your enemies, and pray for them that perse- cute you; that ye may be sons of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust. Document M §8 Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Matthaean P §13 this manner therefore pray ye: After Father vifhich art in heaven Document G §12 But love your enemies, and do litem good, and lend, never despairing; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be sons of the Most High: for he is kind toward the unthankful and evil. Document G §12 Be ye merciful, even as your Father is merciful. LUKAN P §13 When ye pray, say, Father. Matthaean P §24 Behold the birds of the heaven, that they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Matthaean P §24 For all these things do the Gentiles seek; for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. Document M §14 Not every one that saith unto me. Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. LuKAN P §24 Consider the ravens, that they sow not, neither reap; which have no storechamber nor bam; and God feedeth them. LuKAN P §24 For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: but your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. Document G§i6 And why call ye me. Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say ? Gospel MT 12:30 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother. Gospel MT 6:14, is For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Matthaean P §20 Every one therefore who shall confess me before men, him will I also confess before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Matthaean P§is Or what man is there of you, who, if his son shall ask him for a loaf, will give him a stone; or if he shall ask for a fish, will give him a serpent ? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him ? Document MK 3:3s For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. Document MK 11:25 And whensoever ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have aught against any one; that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. LuKAN P §20 Every one who shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God. But he that denieth me in the presence of men, shall be denied in the presence of the angels of God. LUKAN P§15 And of which of you that is a father shall his son ask a loaf, and he give him a stone ? or a fish, and he for a fish give him a serpent ? Or i) he shall ask an egg, will he give him a scorpion? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him ? By the above eleven' passages from Matthew, there are cited all instances of the occurrence of "heaven" or "heavenly" used with Father, in that gospel, for which there are any parallels in the other Synoptics, that is, any possibihty of test by comparison. It may be seen, also, that the only two instances of such usage outside of Mat- thew, namely, document MK 11:25 ^^^ Lukan P§i5, are brought under view above because they form parallels to Matthaean passages. I Two instances under Matthaean P §20. 28o THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE Thus by a study of the above citations, the usage of the Synoptists will be covered, except for those instances where there is no other record than that of Matthew. Of the latter there are nine cases,' which will be considered subsequently. For the present, attention may be directed to those where the check may be made directly by another account. It will be observed that, in the first seven of the above citations from ^Matthew, the reading with "heaven" or "heavenly" has no support in the synoptic parallel, the other gospel having instead simply "Father," or "God," or "Most High." It would involve too considerable a digression to determine the relative worth of these parallels in each case on other grounds than simply the inclusion or omission of the phrase under study. Judgment may be formed without extended discussion; it must suffice to record the significant fact of the difference in this respect. The first instance where the parallel to Matthew agrees in recording "which is in heaven" is that of gospel MT 6:14, i5=document MK 11:25, the only case of the occurrence of the phrase in Mark. And examination of the verse in its document MK context seems to indicate that it is largely inappro- priate at that point, for the natural aim of Jesus on that occasion was simply to answer the interrogation of his disciples by emphasis upon faith and prayer as effective forces. Had Jesus then added the thought in document MK 11 : 25, he would thereby have passed from his subject; the remark about forgiveness would have proved a somewhat confusing conclusion to his inspiring teaching of that hour. The explanation of the inclusion here of MK 11 125 at some time in the history of document MK seems suggested naturally; the reference to prayer in MK 11:24 formed the one attracting point in document MK for any isolated, subsequently known sayings on that subject. In the absence of testimony from the evangehst Luke as to the content of the document MK at this point in the copy used by him, it cannot be known whether this verse had come into docu- ment MK before the time of the production of the Lukan exemplar. If one will regard MK 11 : 25 as a saying of Jesus which had an inde- pendent currency for a time, and was taken into document ^NIK only after much oral transmission, it seems reasonable to explain its phrase 'MaU. 5:16; 6:1; 15:13; 16:17; 18:10,14,19,35; 23:9. LIFE AFTER DEATH 281 "which is in heaven" as the product of its repetition in circles which brought about the hke addition to so many sayings in gospel MT. There is some evidence in support of the conjecture that the appearance of this phrase "which is in heaven" in this single instance in document MK may be due to textual assimilation to the Gospel of Matthew. There is a mass of manuscript evidence which favors the inclusion in the Greek text of Mark 11 :26, the parallel of gospel MT 6:15. This means that document MK 11:25 was taken by its early interpreters to be the parallel of gospel MT 6:14. In the addition of gospel MT 6:15 to document MK 11 125 there may have been further assimilation of the two gospels by the addition from gospel MT 6:14 to document MK 11:25 oi the Matthaean phrase " which is in heaven." In that case, document MK 11:25, ^^ received by the evangehst Matthew and transferred by him to his collection of sayings on prayer, from all documents, in the Sermon on the Mount, did not contain the words, "which is in heaven," these being added at some time under Matthaean influence, that is, either by the evangel- ist or subsequently. When one passes to a comparison of Matthaean P § 20 above with Lukan P § 20, it is found that the Lukan form records the conclusion of the sayings in phraseology different from that of the Matthaean. Elsewhere it has been suggested that of the two forms the Matthaean is the more original, the Lukan being one stage of an evolution by which the saying later took the cast now exhibited in document MK 8 : 38, and yet later the form shown in gospel MT 16:27.' Among the forms in which the saying has come down, the Matthaean P §20 is, therefore, the oldest and most nearly original. On the basis of results reached above in other passages, shall the critical process be advanced yet another stage, and the conjecture made that, as spoken by Jesus, these sayings closed with the word "Father" of Matthaean P§20? In the teaching recorded in the final passage above, document P §15, there is brought under review the only instance of the attach- ment of "heaven" or "heavenly" to " Father" in the gospel by Luke. This single Lukan case has hkewise the distinctive feature of standing in a form in the Greek unHke any other in the Synoptics. The phrases elsewhere than here are quite uniform in construction: I See pp. 79-81. 282 THE TEACHING OF JESUS ABOUT THE FUTURE 6 TTaTTjp ifxtov 6 iv Tots oupavois: Matt. 7:11; MK 11:25. Tov\aTp6