Journal for the Study of the New Testament http://jnt.sagepub.

com/

Matt. 23:39 = Luke 13:35b as a Conditional Prophecy

Dale C. Allison, JR Journal for the Study of the New Testament 1983 5: 75 DOI: 10.1177/0142064X8300501803 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jnt.sagepub.com/content/5/18/75.citation

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journal for the Study of the New Testament can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jnt.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jnt.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Jan 1, 1983 What is This?

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

75

MATT.

23:39

LUKE 13:35b AS A CONDITIONAL PROPHECY

Dale C. Allison, Jr., Texas Christian University, Ft. Worth,

Texas,
U.S.A.

Matt. 23:39 (= Luke 13:3Sb: Q) reads as follows: &dquo;For I say to you, you will not see me from now on until you say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord&dquo; (cf. Ps.

118[117]:26) /1/. Whether with reference to Matthew or Luke, Q, interpretations of this verse have generally followed one of two paths. Either it has been construed as a declaration of unqualified judgement, or commentators have thought the verse to hold forth the hope that Israel might one day accept her Messiah, Jesus (cf. Rom. 11:25-27). (The two readings agree in assuming that the eschatological redemption is in view /2/.) John Calvin, representing the first alternative, wrote, &dquo;He [Jesus] will not come to them Ithe Jews] until they cry out in fear - too late - at the sight of His Majesty, truly He is Son of God &dquo; /3/. T.W. Manson paraphrased to similar effect: &dquo;The time will come when you will be ready to say to
to Jesus or

Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; but then it will be too late&dquo; /4/. And J.C. Fenton has affirmed that, according to Matt. 23:39, &dquo;Jesus will not be seen by Jerusalem again before he comes in judgement, and then they will greet him, but with mourning&dquo; /5/. But against Calvin, Manson and Fenton, E6XoycUv and c6Xoynp6vog are not words of fear and trembling, nor are they typically voiced by the ignorant, In the LXX - including, the condemned or those in mourning. notably, Ps. 117:26, which is cited in our text - and in the New Testament, EUOYELV and c6Xoyqpevog (like the Hebrew 11-1) are usually expressions of joy, and they consistently have a very positive connotation: &dquo;to praise,&dquo; &dquo;to extol,&dquo; &dquo;to bless,&dquo; For this reason, it is not easy to envision &dquo;to greet&dquo; /6/. the words of Ps. 118[117]:26 as coming, begrudgingly or otherwise, from the lips of those for whom the messianic advent must mean only destruction. Further, what precedent is there in ancient Jewish or early Christian literature for the notion
me,

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

76

that the wicked man or the unbeliever will utter a blessing when the Lord or his Messiah comes to the earth? When the Son of Man comes on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory, the faithless tribes of the earth will not bless him and God; rather will they weep and wail (Matt. 24:30; Rev. 1:7) /7/.
Over against the interpretation just criticized, Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b can be understood to mean that, when the Messiah comes, Jerusalem will know salvation. That is, the recitation of Ps. 118[117]:26 will be offered freely and with joy. The Messiah will come to his people and they will welcome him and say, &dquo;Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.&dquo; This reading, which has some scholarly support /8/, and which is more in accord with the spirit of Ps. 118[117],has against it this: Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b can hardly be read in Luke 13:35a (see isolation, but is bound up with Matt. 23:38 Luke 13:35a is a pronouncement below). However, Matt. 23:38 of judgement, and if its sequel, Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b, is nothing but a straightforward declaration of salvation in the offing, the result is the coupling of discontiguous sentiments. One naturally expects a harsher note to conclude the preceding lines /9/. So if Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b is simply a promise of salvation, then one is almost compelled to treat it as a secondary - and infelicitous - addition /10/. But this is not an attractive option. Not only should one prefer, if possible, Luke to make sense of a text as it stands, but Matt. 23:39 13:35b is more firmly wedded to its immediate context than has been recognized.
= =

Concerning this last point, Ps. 118[117]:26a is the scripture quoted in Matt. 23:39 and its parallel, and the Old Testament verse is followed by this: &dquo;We bless you from the house (n5/oCxou) of the Lord&dquo; (118[117]:26b). Now the prophecy of Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b is also joined to a
statement about the &dquo;house&dquo; (olxog) of the Lord: &dquo;Behold, your house is forsaken&dquo; (Matt. 23:38 Luke 13:35a) /11/. This is probably not to be put down to coincidence. Ps. 1181117] tells not only of worshippers blessing the one who comes in the name of the Lord (26a), it also speaks of a blessing that comes from This fact best the house of the Lord, from the temple (26b). explains why Qs assertion about the forsaken house - which we take to include Jerusalem and the temple /12/ - is accompanied by another which concerns the coming redemption. Matt. 23:38 Luke 13:35a implies that Jerusalem and its temple have fallen into sin and hence are headed for disaster; cf. Mark 11:17;
=
=

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

77

13:2; 14:58; and Luke 23:27-31. It follows that the temple in the capital cannot be, as it is in Ps. 118[1171:26, the source of any proper blessing. It likewise follows that those in the temple do not now bless Gods spokesman, Jesus, he who will someday come as the Messiah. But this means that the words of Ps. 118[117]:26, if they be understood (as they are in Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b) as prophetic /13/, must refer to some time yet ahead. And this is precisely what one finds in our synoptic text: the time for the blessing of the one who comes in the name of the Lord is moved into the future. So it appears that Matt. 23:38-39 Luke 13:35 reflects a consistent interpretation of Ps. 118[117]:26. &dquo;Your house is forsaken&dquo; is the reason why there is presently no fulfillment of the prophetic Psalm, why the exclamation, &dquo;Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord,&dquo; is thought of as outstanding. The lines from Q are accordingly best regarded as a unit, which puts a question mark over any interpretation that requires us to divide them.
=

There is Luke

a
one

third

possible interpretation

for Matt. 23:39

which, we urge, should be adopted. &dquo;Until you say&dquo; (w av ECRNTE or gwg IcL 6TE /14/) can be understood to signal a conditional sentence /15/. The text then means not, when the Messiah comes, his people will bless him, but rather, when his people bless him, the Messiah will come. In other words, the date of the redemption is contingent upon Israels

13:35b,

acceptance of the person and work of Jesus. bolster this interpretation.

Four considerations

First, belief in the contingency of the time of the final redemption is well-attested in Jewish sources of the second century and later. The following passages are typical: (1) R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus (ca. 80-120 C.E.) is purported to have
said that if Israel does not repent she will not be delivered; but if she does repent she will be delivered (b. Sanh. 97b) /16/. (2) According to R. Simeon b. Yohai (ca. 140-160 C.E.), if the nation would keep only two Sabbaths, the Lord would immediately usher in salvation (b. Sabb. 118b). (3) In b. Sanh. 98a we read that Zeiri (middle Amoraic) declared in the name of R. ijanina b. Hama (early Amoraic) that the Son of David will not come until no conceited men remain in Israel. (4) Sifre Deut. 41 (79b, Tannaitic) announces that if Israel were to keep the Law, God would therewith send Elijah. Similar sentiments are expressed in, among other places, b. B. Bat. l0a (R. Judah, ca. 170-200 C.E.), b. Sanh. 97b (R. Samuel b. Nahmani [middle Amoraic] in the name of R. Jonathan [early Amoraic]), b. Sanh. 98a

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

78

(R. Alexandri, early Amoraic), b.Yoma 86b (R. Jonathan,early Amoraic), and y. Taan. 63d (R. Joshua b. Levi, early Amoraic). In addition to the wealth of the relevant rabbinic material,
Acts 3:19-21 - which probably contains pre-Lukan tradition supplies firm evidence that belief in a contingent eschatology could be found already in the first century /17/. Moreover, there are a number of places in the Pseudepigrapha where repentance and the consummation of the age are held together, and in some of these it seems likely that repentance is assumed to be a precondition for the coming redemption /18/. Possibilities include T. Dan. 6:4 (lst or 2nd cent. B.C.E.?), T. sim. 6:2-7 (lst or 2nd cent. B.C.E.?), T. Jud. 23:5 (1st or 2nd cent. B.C.E.?), As Mos. 1:18 (2nd cent. B.C.E. or 1st cent. C.E.), 2 Apoc. Bar. 78:7 (late 1st or early 2nd cent. C.E.), and Ap. Ab. 29 (2nd cent. C.E.?) /19/. Finally, 4 Ezra (late first, early 2nd cent. C.E.) rebuts the thought that the Kingdom of God has been delayed on account of the sins of those who dwell on the earth /20/ and thereby evidently discounts the claim presumably made by someone known to the author - that righteousness might hasten the climax of the eschatological

drama /21/.

contingent state in Greek apodosis is dependent In such cases the upon the realization of the protasis /22/. meaning of Ews is not simply temporal (&dquo;until&dquo;) /23/ but Luke properly conditional (close to &dquo;unless&dquo;). Matt. 5:26 15:59; Matt. 18:30; Acts 23:12; and 2 Thess. 2:7 are examples from the New Testament /24/. Similarly, the Hebrew or Aramaic 1y - which, presumably, lies behind the ~wg of Matt. 23:39
can

Secondly, lwg

indicate

sentences in which the realization of the

Luke 13:35b if we have to do with a word of Jesus or the Palestinian community (cf. the Syriac: nnuy) - sometimes signifies more than the inevitable passing of a temporal span: it can also be used when an envisioned state is contingent upon some act that may or may not be performed /25/. Illustrations of this are: Gen. 19:22: &dquo;I can do nothing until (1Y; LXX: w) you arrive there.&dquo; Gen. 29:8: &dquo;We cannot water the sheep until (1Y; LXX: lwg) all the flocks are gathered and the stone is rolled away from the mouth of the well.&dquo; Deut. 22:2: &dquo;It shall be with you until (1y; LXX: Ewg av) your brother seeks it&dquo; (cf. 11 Q Temple lxiv, 15). Ezra 4:21: &dquo;Make a decree ... that this city not be built again until (1y) a decree is made by me.&dquo; Ahikar 130-31: &dquo;Rest for your soul do not take until (~y) you have paid back the loan.&dquo; Cowley ii, 17: &dquo;Ours you have a right to seize until (1y) you are indemnitied in full.&dquo; I Q S

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

79

viii, 19: &dquo;No member of the Covenant who blatantly takes away a word from all that is commanded shall touch the sacred meal ... until (1Y) his deeds are cleansed from all error.&dquo; 11 Q Temple lviii, 18: &dquo;And he will not go forth until (1Y) he has first II gone before the high priest.&dquo; m. Ber. 7:5: &dquo;The blessing over wine may not be said until (1y) water be added to it.&dquo; b. Sanh. 98a: &dquo;The Son of David will not come until (7y) all judges and officers are gone from Israel.&dquo; Lev. Rab. 24:3 &dquo;They should not go away from this place until (1Y) they notice a clot of blood on the surface of the water.&dquo; y. Ter. 46c: &dquo;They shall not see me until (1y) they have taken a bath.&dquo; In most of the texts just cited, &dquo;unless&dquo; would be no less adequate a translation than &dquo;until.&dquo;
Luke 13:35b argues Thirdly, the structure of Matt. 23:39 for the conditional interpretation. There appears to have been a standard way of expressing ones belief as to what condition(s) must be realized before the eschatological redemption could come. Consider the following passages:
=

b. Sanh.

98a: Zeiri (middle Amoraic) said in R. Haninas name (late Tannaitic): &dquo;The Son of David will not come until (1Y)
are no

there

conceited

men

in Israel.&dquo;

R. Hama b. Hannina (early Amoraic) said: &dquo;The Son of David will not come until Oy) even the pettiest kingdom ceases to hold power over Israel.&dquo;
b. Sanh. 98a: b. Sanh. 98a: R. Simlai (early Amoraic) said in the name of R. Eleazar b. Simeon (late Tannaitic): &dquo;The Son of David will not come until (1y) all judges and officers are gone from Israel. b. sanh. 98a: R. Hanina (late Tannaitic) said: &dquo;The Son of David will not come until (1Y) a fish is sought for an invalid and cannot be procured.&dquo; b. Ab.
zar.

Sa:

R. Jose

(ca. 130 C.E.) said: &dquo;The

will not come until IT exhausted.&dquo;

b. sanh.

(1y)

Son of David all the souls destined for bodies are

98b: Rab (last half of the second century C.E.) said: &dquo;The Son of David will not come until (Ty) the [Roman] power enfolds Israel for nine months.&dquo; Each of these texts has the forth thus:
same

structure, which

can

be

set

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

80

(a)

statement about the messianic advent with adverbial

particle
(b)
(c)

of negation attached will not come&dquo;)

(&dquo;The Son

of David

conditional

particle (uy)
(in Israel)

condition to be met the messianic advent

(e.g.,
can

for fulfillment of &dquo;no conceited men in

Israel&dquo;)
Now Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b precisely the same structure:
=

be

analyzed

as

having

(a)

particle of negation attached (&dquo;You &dquo;me&dquo; being Jesus, the Messiah)

(b) (c)
conditional particle

statement about the messianic advent with adverbial will not see me,&dquo;

(E

condition to be met (in Israel) for fulfillment of the messianic advent (those in Jerusalem utter, &dquo;Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord,&dquo; and thereby acknowledge the person and work of

Jesus).
It therefore appears that the synoptic verse sets forth, in traditional fashion, a condition for the great redemption.
a

Fourthly, we have argued that whereas, on the one hand, Matt. 23:39 = Luke 13:35b is not likely to be a statement of utter rejection, on the other hand, an unqualified announcement Luke of salvation does not follow well upon Matt. 23:37-38 13:34-35a (see above, pp. 1-3). The conditional interpretation commends itself by finding a middle ground that avoids the pitfalls of the other alternatives. The thought of judgement is present because, for now, Israel has not received the messenger of God; she has refused to accept the one sent to her, and therefore the redemption has not come. And yet, despite this element of judgement, the thought of salvation is also present. For Jesus affirms that, if she will, Jerusalem can, in the end, bless in the name of the Lord the one who will come, and her doing so, that is, her repentance, will lead to deliverance.
=

Even if it does not

or

require

early church,

we

cannot be certain

Sitz im Leben within Judaism that the lament over

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

81

Luke 13:34-35, was spoken by Jerusalem, Matt. 23:37-39 Jesus /26/. But whatever one concludes concerning the genesis of our text, its conclusion, Matt. 23:39 Luke 13:35b, was evidently formulated to give expression to the conviction that,
= =

if Israel would repent, the end would come. The verse should thus be compared with Acts 3:19-21, in which Peter exhorts the people of Jerusalem to repent and turn again, in order that times of refreshing might come from the Lord, that is, that he might send Jesus the Messiah. Both the text from Q and the sentence from Peters sermon make the time of the Kingdoms coming hinge upon the repentance of Gods people (cf. also 2 Pet. 3:11-12 and 2 Clem. 12).

NOTES

Luke does not have Matthews "from now on" (&a cgr;π&a cgr;ρτι), /1/ which must be regarded as redactional (cf. 26:29 and 64). Matthew does not have Lukes "the time comes when" (&e acgr;ξει &oacgr;τε), which may have stood in Q; but there is much uncertainty here. &e acgr;ξει &oacgr;τε has weak textual support (D lat sy s Simple &eacgr;ω&sfgr; is read by P 75 R syP sa 892. N Θ &eacgr;ω&sfgr; &a cgr;ν is found in f13. has &e acgr;ξει &oacgr;τϵ in the text but in brackets, indicating doubtful authenticity. For the reasons see T.W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus, /2/ London: SCM, 1949, 127-28. Luke, however, may have seen the sayings fulfillment in the triumphal entry; see Luke 19:38. Matthew, by placing the verse after Jesus arrival in Jerusalem, excludes this possibility. John Calvin, A Harmony of the Gospels Matthew, Mark and /3/ Luke, vol. III, trans. A.W. Morrison, Edinburgh: Saint Andrew, 1972, 71. /4/ Sayings, 128. J.C. Fenton, Saint Matthew, Middlesex: Penguin, 1963, 377. /5/ Cf. S. Schulz, Q: Die Spruchquelle der Evangelisten, ZUrich: Theologischer Verlag, 1972, 358. See H. van der Kwaak, "Die Klage über Jerusalem (Matth. /6/ XXIII 37-39)," NovT 8 (1966), 165-66; W. Beyer, "ϵ&uacgr;λ&ogr;&gam a;&eacgr;ω κτλ.," TDNT 2 (1964), 754-765; and J. Scharbert, "" TDOT 2 (1975), 279-308. /7/ The Good News According to According to E. Schweizer ( Matthew, Atlanta: John Knox, 1975, 445), Matt. 21:9 shows "that one can rejoice while still in ignorance, without realizing what one is doing." This, however, hardly applies to Matt. 23:37-39, where the eschatological vindication of Jesus is in view: that event will not leave people in ignorance.

). c

BL Nestle

4 p κ 5

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

82

/8/

F.

Godet,
T.
on

Edinburgh:
Commentary

A Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke, 5th ed., & T. Clark, 1957, 2:131-132; I.H. Marshall, Luke (New International Greek Testament

Commentary), Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1978, 577; and J. Ernst, Das Evangelium nach Lukas (RNT), Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1977, 434. Schweizer ( Matthew, 445) and D. Hill (The Gospel of Matthew New Century Bible , London: Oliphants, 1975, 316) leave the question open. Cf. van der Kwaak, "Klage über Jerusalem," 165. /9/ /10/ Cf. R. Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, rev. ed., New York: Harper& Row, 1963, 115. /11/ Matthew adds &eacgr;ρημ&ogr;&sfgr;, "desolate," at least according to
most

early

mss.

Scholars have debated whether the &ogr;&Tgr;&kap a;&ogr;&sfgr; of Matt. 23:38 = Luke 13:35a is the temple or Jerusalem; see, e.g., O.H. Steck, Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten (WMANT 23), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1967, 228, n. 3; D.E. Garland, The Intention of Matthew 23 (NovTSup 52), Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1979, 198-200; and F.D. Weinert, "Luke, the Temple, and Jesus Saying about Jerusalems Abandoned House (Luke 13:34-35)," CBQ 44 (1982), 75-76, But it is not necessary to distinguish here between temple and city. Jewish "texts dealing with the Temple always implicitly, and usually explicitly, implicate the city, just as Jerusalem became the quintessence of the land, so also the Temple became the quintessence of Jerusalem." As far as the ancient literature is concerned, one may speak of "the interpenetration or the identification of the City and the Temple and the indiscriminate transition from the one to the other." So W.D. Davies, The Gospel and the Land, Berkeley, California: University of California, 1974, 152 and 144 respectively. For texts and discussion see further ibid., 144-145 and 150-154; also L.R. Fisher, "The Temple Quarter," JSS 8 (1963), 34-41. /13/ In the early church Ps. 118 was viewed as containing prophecies of the messianic advent; it was an important source of testimonia. Note Acts 2:33; 4:11; Mark 11:9-10; 12:10; and 1 Pet. 2:7 and see B. Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, London: SCM, 1961, 43-44, 111-112, 169-174, 179-180, 184-186. There is also evidence that Ps. 118 was interpreted messianically in Judaism; see E. Werner, "Hosanna in the Gospels," JBL 65 (1946), 97-122 and J. Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus, London: SCM, 1966, 256-260. /14/ See n. 1 above. /15/ Cf. van der Kwaak, "Klage über Jerusalem," 165-70.

/12/

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

83

/16/ It should be noted that R. Eliezars statement occurs in a debate with R. Joshua, who takes the other side: the redemption will come even before Israel repents. For discussion of this debate see L. Landman, "Introduction," in Messianism in the Talmudic Era, ed. L. Landman, New York: KTAV, 1979, xix-xxiii
and E.E. Urbach, "Redemption and Repentance in Talmudic Judaism," in Types of Redemption (Studies in the History of Religion 18), ed. R.J. Zwi Werblowsky and C.J. Bleeker, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970, 191-206. /17/ For discussion of Acts 3:19-21 see especially R.F. Zehnle, Peters Pentecost Discourse (SBLMS 15), Nashville: Abingdon, 1971, 45-60, 71-75 and F. Hahn, "Das Problem alter in der Apostelgeschichte christologischer unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Act 3, 19-21," in Les

Überlieferungen

Actes des

ed. J.

Apõtres: Traditions, rédaction, théologie (BETL 48), Kremer, Gembloux/Leuven: J. Duculot/Leuven University,

problem created by the juxtaposition of apocalyptic determinism and a contingent eschatology in some of the intertestamental literature - except
to observe that the undeniable contradiction is not extraordinary but simply one more instance of those paradoxes or antinomies that run throughout all religious traditions, including the Biblical. Is the conjoining of a Naherwartung with belief in the conditional nature of prophecy any more difficult than the rabbinic statements that hold together divine foreknowledge and human free-will? "All is foreseen, but freedom of choice is

1979, /18/

129-154. We cannot here enter into the

One can hardly answer, Yes, especially Ab. 3:16). in view of the "essential irrationality" of eschatological thinking; see R. Otto, The Kingdom of God and the Son of Man, new and rev. ed., London: Lutterworth, 1943, 59-63. It is also to be observed that several apocalypses combine the ideas of determinism and human freedom; contrast, e.g., 1 En. 41:8; 2 Apoc. Bar. 42:7; and Apoc. Ab. 22 with 1 En. 43:2; 2 Apoc. Bar. 54:15, 19; 85:7; and Apoc. Ab. 26. /19/ In Apoc. Ab. 29 we have a vision in which righteous men "hasten" the glory of Gods name: "And then shall righteous men of thy seed be left in the number which is kept secret by me, hastening in the glory of My Name to the place prepared beforehand for them ..." (Box). Cf. the σπϵυδoντα&sfgr; of 2 Pet. 3:12. /20/ 4:39: "It is perhaps on account of us that the time of threshing is delayed for the righteous - on account of the sins of those who dwell on earth" (RSV). The seer goes on to reject this notion; see 4:40-43.

m. given" (

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

84

/21/ We should also perhaps observe that in the Testament (or Assumption of Moses, it is the death of Taxo and his sons - a ) death that is actively sought - which "forces" the end; see J. Licht, "Taxo, or the Apocalyptic Doctrine of Vengeance," JJS 12 (1961), 95-103 and D.C. Carlson, "Vengeance and Angelic Mediation in Testament of Moses 9 and 10," JBL 101 (1982), 85-95. And it is interesting that Ps. Sol. 17 places the promise of redemption within a context of moral exhortation and thus seems to assume that national penitence can hasten the divine intervention; cf. S. Mowickel, He That Cometh, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1956, 297. /22/ Cf. W.W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb, New York: St. Martins, 1965, 235-37. /23/ In some instances,of course, &eacgr;ω&sfgr;, like the Hebrew and Aramaic (with which we shall be concerned below), loses altogether the idea of termination and expresses "a limit which is not absolute (terminating the preceding action), but only relative, beyond which the action or state described in the principal clause still continues" (E. Kautzsch and A.E. Cowley, Gesenius Hebrew Grammar, 2nd ed., Oxford: Clarendon, 1910, 503). See e.g., Gen. 26:13; 49:10; Ps. 112[111]:8; Matt. 10:23; Mark 9:1; and 13:19. /24/ Cf. van der Kwaak, "Klage über Jerusalem," 170. /25/ For further discussion of see K. Beyer, Semitische
Vandenhoeck & Testament, SUNT 1, n. 1. /26/ At least five points can be made in favor of authenticity. (1) The threat against Jerusalem and its holy place has its parallel in Jesus prediction of the end of the temple (Mark 13:2 and parallels). (2) Jesus elsewhere spoke of the violent fate that the true prophet must suffer (Luke 13:31-33; Luke 6:22 = Matt. 5:11-12; Matt. 23:34-36 Luke 11:49-51). (3) The fate of being stoned is perhaps envisioned for the speaker (so J. Jeremias, New Testament Theology, New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1971, 284). (4) There are synoptic passages which, if authentic, show us that Jesus did not think of the time of the eschatological redemption as unalterably fixed; see, e.g., Luke 13:6-9; 18:1-8; and Mark 13:18. (5) No explicit claim to Messiahship is made: the status of the speaker is only indirectly indicated, which is consistent with what we otherwise know of Jesus.
Syntax im
Neuen

Göttingen:

Ruprecht, 1962, 132,

Downloaded from jnt.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013