Evangelists' Calendar

M. D. GOULDER

BY THE SAME AUTHOR Type and History in Acts (1964) Midrash and Lection in Matthew (1974)

M. D. G O U L D E R

The Evangelists' Calendar A LECTIONARY EXPLANATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCRIPTURE The Speaker's Lectures in Biblical Studies

1972

LONDON

SPCK

First published 1978 SPCK Holy Trinity Church Marylebone Road London NW1 4DU © M. D. Goulder 1978

THE JACKET picture shows the Bodmer papyrus, p75, Luke 10.36—11.1. The papyrus is usually dated between 175 and 225, about a century after Luke's autograph. The projection of two epsilons from the left margin of the text should be noted, one near the top, the other on the bottom line. These can be explained as markers for the reading of the Gospel in a continuous cycle. The story of the scribe who tempted Jesus and was answered by the parable of the Good Samaritan ends in the line above the first edentation; Mary and Martha then follow until the line above the second edentation; then follows Jesus' teaching on prayer. Dr Goulder argues that such a continuous reading system, with these divisions, was a part of the intention of Luke himself. (The photograph is from Papyrus Bodmer XIV, edited by V. Martin and R. Kasser, published in 1961 for the Bibliotheca Bodmeriana.)

Printed in Great Britain by R. & R. Clark Ltd Edinburgh ISBN 0 281 03583 0

CONTENTS

Preface List of Abbreviations 1

vii xiii

A CYCLE OF LITURGICAL GOSPELS

2 THE TORAH AS AN ANNUAL CYCLE OF READINGS (i) The Calendars (ii) The Torah as an Annual Cycle of Recitals (iii) The Holiness Code and the Autumn Festival Readings (iv) The Sidrot as the Work of the Redactors (v) The Chronicler's Work as an Annual Reading Cycle (vi) The Samaritan Annual Cycle (vii) The Special Sabbaths (viii) Philo (ix) Matthew APPENDIX THE DECLINE AND DEMISE OF THE ANNUAL NISAN LECTIONARY CYCLE

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Armenian Lectionary The Origins of the Triennial Cycle The Mishnah Megillah The Growth of the Triennial Cycle

1 19 21 26 31 35 38 40 42 47 48

52

53 56 61 64

TABLE I

The Traditional Sidrot and Haphfarot TABLE II

3

67

The Chronicler's Lectionary System

70

LUKE AND THE ANNUAL TORAH CYCLE

73

TABLE I I I

4

The Sidrot and St Luke's Gospel

103

THE (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

105 106 114 126 129

DEVELOPMENT OF THE HISTORIES CYCLE Five Alternative Prophetic Cycles The Formation of the D Histories Cycle The Redaction of the Law and the Chroniclers The Redaction of the Law and the Histories V

(v) The Use of the Histories Cycle in 1 Maccabees

132

TABLE IV

A Reconstruction of the D Lectionary Year

139

TABLE V 5

1 Maccabees as Readings between Pentecost and New Year

140

L U K E A N D THE HISTORIES

141

TABLE VI

6

Luke and the Histories Cycle

156

ISAIAH, LUKE AND THE TWELVE (i) The Liturgical Origins of Isaiah (ii) Luke and Isaiah 1—12 (iii) Isaiah and the Lucan Journey (iv) The Liturgical Origins of "The Twelve'

157 157 164 170 174

TABLE V I I

Isaiah, Luke and the Twelve

181

7

PENTECOST AND THE THIRD CANON (i) Ruth (ii) Job (iii) Aramaic Daniel (iv) Hebrew Daniel (v) Proverbs (vi) Ecclesiasticus

183 184 186 191 199 204 206

8

M A T T H E W , T H E O.T. C Y C L E S A N D T H E EPISTLE

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 9

The Formula-Citations The Origin of the Epistle A Lectionary Hypothesis Pauline Logia in Matthaean Discourses

MARK AND HIS SUCCESSORS TABLE VIII The Lectionary System in Operation in the Churches of the Synoptic Evangelists

INDEXES Biblical Passages Extra-Biblical Passages General Index

212

215 218 223 227 241 following page 306

307 327 329

PREFACE

This book is a revised and expanded form of the first six Speaker's Lectures in Biblical Studies, delivered in Trinity College, Oxford, in the summer of 1972. I was elected Speaker's Lecturer originally for three years, 1968-71, to present the thesis that Matthew had no other considerable source but Mark, which he elaborated midrashically. During the first of these years, a second idea occurred to me, that it was possible to give a more convincing account of the arrangement of Matthew than was available, on the assumption that the Gospel was a lectionary book—that is, a series of liturgical Gospels for the Saturdays and feasts of a Jewish-Christian Year, taken in order. I was able to incorporate this suggestion into the 1970 and 1971 Lectures, and the whole Matthaean thesis was published in 1974 under the title Midrash and Lection in Matthew. At every step, the claims I had been making for Matthew involved the consideration of Luke. This had been so from the beginning, for if Matthew had only Mark and no Q, the Q material in Luke could be explained only on the hypothesis that Luke derived it from Matthew. The problem here was not to show the Lucan versions of Q-sayings to be secondary—for which I was able to produce arguments—but to account for the changes that Luke would then have made in the Matthaean order. Here again, it was a lectionary thesis which pro.vided a neat solution to the difficulty: only whereas Matthew had been concerned principally to provide Discourses to fit the themes of the Jewish-Christian Feasts, Luke was attempting something more elaborate in a weekly story 'fulfilling* the Saturday Old Testament lesson. I provided a sketch of such a theory in the last chapter of my Matthaean book, and asked the Electors for an extension of two years (the maximum) to discuss the topic more fully. This they granted, and in 1972 I attempted to establish the background of O.T. readings in the first century. In 1973 I applied the resulting pattern to the exegesis of Luke as a whole. It may be of assistance to the reader if I make two comments here, one on the way in which my lectionary theory suggested itself, and the other on the logic of the exposition as I have come to write it. Dr D. E. Nineham writes, in the Introduction to his The Gospel of Saint

Mark:

It appears that the tradition on which the Gospels are based was handed on during the greater part of the oral period in the context of public and formal occasions-, that is to say, the people by whom it was passed on were preachers and teachers, speaking at meetings for public worship . . . The natural thing would be for the preacher or catechist to repeat one story, or parable, or group of sayings, at each meeting and then go on to expound its significance for his hearers. Naturally he would choose his story or parable on each occasion in accordance with the particular needs of his audience.1 Nineham sums up accurately the conclusion of forty years of form critical study, and although he does not claim proof ('It appears'), the picture which he presents is very plausible. Now suppose that we go on and ask, 'On what occasion would the preacher be especially likely to choose to tell the Resurrection story, say?', the answer must be, 'Well, presumably on Easter Day.' This is not to deny that it might have been told on other days, but surely it will have been told at Easter; and the fact that the story is set in all Christian lectionaries to be read at Easter is not irrelevant. What about the Passion story? Well, the early lectionaries all set the Passion story for Maundy Thursday/Good Friday, and in many cases they divide it up into units for a 24-hour vigil, with readings at the watches, every three hours. Christians did not keep Good Friday in the first century, but they did keep Passover at first; and so we cannot help wondering whether the churches of the evangelists did not tell the Passion story each year at Passover, starting with the Last Supper at the time of the Paschal meal, and whether such a practice would not have been very likely in the 30s. We are encouraged in such a thought by the fact that all the four Gospels themselves divide the story into three-hour units, or something similar; and by the further fact that Luke and John still have the same indications of time even when the stories differ from those in Mark and Matthew. I do not think that these suggestions will be very surprising, but once one admits early lectionary use into the discussion, a further point, not so obvious, will occur to us. Egeria, our first witness to Christian lectionary practice, tells us that in Jerusalem about 380, on the Tuesday in Holy Week the bishop 'reads the passage from the Gospel according to Matthew where the Lord says, "See that no man lead you astray". The bishop reads the whole of that discourse.'2 On Wednesday a presbyter read 'the passage about Judas 1 2

(Harmondsworth 1963), pp. 21 f., Nineham's italics. J. Wilkinson, Egeria's Travels [£T] (London 1971), ch. 33, p. 134.

Iscariot going to the Jews and fixing what they must pay him to betray the Lord'. 1 The Tuesday lesson, then, was Matt. 24—25 ('the whole of that Discourse'), and the Wednesday lesson was also from Matthew, since he alone tells of the money Judas 'fixed'. The verses Egeria refers to are Matt. 26.14-16, but the fact that she cites only Matt. 24.4 for Tuesday may mean that all the first sixteen verses were read: they include Jesus' words, 'You know that after two days the Passover is coming', and the supper at Simon's house, which took place on the Wednesday night. Whether this is so or not, the suggestion is on Matthew's page before us: could it be that the first Christians remembered Judas' betrayal and Simon's supper the day before Passover, and the Apocalyptic Discourse before that? We should have in this way an attractive explanation both for the details of time in the Gospels, and for the serial use in Egeria (late though she is): the last chapters of the Gospels were, so to speak, lessons for •Holy Week'. Once we have got as far as this, the soaring possibility follows: could it be that the Gospels are in the order in which we have them because they provided lessons for a whole primitive Christian Year, partly Jewish in its background, but reaching its climax each year at Passover and Easter? All three Synoptics close with an Apocalyptic Discourse, a Passion narrative and Resurrection material: could it be that all three were written as a series of 'readings' for a succession of Saturday nights and festivals running up to Easter? The preacher would still be choosing his story to suit the needs of his audience, as Nineham conjectured, but the needs would arise from the (O.T.) texts in the liturgy, as with a modern sermon. That is a big leap, but scholarship sometimes advances by the careful consideration of big leaps and soaring possibilities. What kind of considerations would be relevant to examining such a proposal? Many. We should need to know what were the themes, and if possible the readings, for the Jewish holy days at the period. We should need to know the way in which the synagogues read the Law and the Prophets on the intervening sabbaths. We should need evidence that the churches of the evangelists still observed Jewish festivals and traditional synagogue lections. We should need some external check on the subdivision of the Gospels into Nineham's 'stories or parables or groups of sayings', lest the whole topic break down into subjectivism. We should need some fairly striking correlation between the Jewish holy days and the passages in the Gospels which correspond with them; and a much more than random 1

ibid., ch. 34, p. 134.

correlation between the individual pericopae and the sabbath readings. That is asking quite a lot. The amount of knowledge that is available to us varies. Most of the Jewish holy days were biblical, and had been long established by our era; and even where the evidence is Talmudic, a much earlier date is often arguable. The sabbath reading system is a matter for learned dispute, but a good case can be made for the Torah readings in our period, and some case, of a cumulative kind, for the other books. There are formulas in the texts of the Gospels which suggest where the evangelists divided the pericopae, and the paragraphs are sometimes marked in the early manuscripts. Some correlations leap to the eye: the Sermon on the Mount, for example, would make a fine Christian comment on Pentecost as the feast of the Law-giving on Sinai, and the Harvest Parables in all three Gospels would be suitable for Tabernacles, or Ingathering, as the festival was once called. But we must be clear from the start that there is never going to be enough evidence to 'prove' the case. I can never hope to achieve more than a plausible reconstruction, and to reject this as 'speculative' is to miss the point; when we have no adequate evidence, our alternatives are to speculate or to go ignorant. It is a commonplace of philosophy that some arguments are Kke links in a chain, and others are like spokes in a bicycle-wheel. We all have a preference for the former: we know where we are, and can spot the fallacies. But to insist upon the former alone is to reduce scholarship to pedantry. In considerable tracts of ancient history and archaeology the arguments available are of the latter kind. We have this fact from here and that from there, and all that can be hoped for is an imaginative reconstruction that will explain them plausibly. The arguments will be cumulative, and in part subjective, but they will be none the worse for that. My own book is such. My reconstructions of the Torah reading-cycle and the Prophetic cycles are spoke-like, accounting for the evidence we have in what seems a credible context. None of these would hold the weight of the argument on its own, but before long they are seen to support one another. Ruth, Job and Daniel, for example, can be rather convincingly explained on this basis; and later Luke and Mark as well as Matthew. Each plausible explanation added helps to confirm the whole structure. Bicycle-spoke arguments impose more strain on the reader than chain-link arguments: he has to make judgements all the time, and he cannot form an opinion of the whole until the end. I feel justified in making these demands because of the importance of my theory, should it turn out to be true: it would explain so much, on so

radically new a basis. The judgement whether a new theory is right or wrong, in whole or in part, belongs not to its prejudiced author, but to his peers, the scholars of his discipline. Scholars are properly sceptical of radical new theories; it seems unlikely that the whole learned community has been wrong in some important matter. Yet, of course, from time to time learned communities have been found to be mistaken, even in very important matters. Radical changes are not easily accepted—as Max Planck is said to have observed, old theories do not die, but professors do. I do not wish such a fate upon my colleagues and friends; but I do hope that they will not think that they have dismissed the book by noting that it is speculative. When our evidence is limited, disciplined imagination is a virtue. The nightmare which has haunted me throughout is that I should be drawn into writing a one-man Bible Commentary. Who is sufficient for such a thing? I have accordingly limited myself by excluding three large areas of study. First, I have omitted all those Old Testament books which were not, or not much, used by Luke and his fellow synoptists: this has meant in practice the prophetic books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and a number of the Writings, such as Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon. Second, it has been impossible to cover the Psalter, which has an elaborate and fascinating history of composition requiring a monograph, even though the use of the Psalms is cardinal in the Synoptic Passion narratives. Third, I have omitted chapters on Acts, on John, and on Revelation, as being inessential to the argument, and have left the discussion of Mark as the natural climax. In a cumulative argument, the omission of any material reduces its plausibility; but there is evidence enough in three hundred pages for the critic to determine its validity. My thanks are due to my old college, Trinity, which kindly put the Danson Room at my disposal throughout the Lectures; to Professor H. F. D. Sparks, Canon John Drury and Canon Cheslyn Jones, and some thirty students, who attended and asked pertinent and helpful questions; to Mr J. H. Eaton, who has kindly read and commented on Chapters 2 and 4; and to the Electors who entrusted me with so august a Lectureship. Birmingham, March 1976

MICHAEL GOULDER

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Al Ant. AT B.J. BJRL BRPOS CHB e. E.T. ET FCB Git. H.E. HUCA Huck IOT JBL JG JJS JQR JTS Judaism KP LXX Meg. Mek. Midr.

Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel. 2e. E.T. London 1965 Josephus, Antiquitates Judaeorum Author's translation Josephus, Bellum Judaicum Bulletin of John Rylands Library J. Mann, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue. Vol. i. Cincinnati 1940 P. R. Ackroyd & C. F. Evans (eds), The Cambridge History of the Bible. Cambridge 1970 edition English translation J. Wilkinson, Egeria's Travels. London 1971 H. von Campenhausen, The Formation of the Christian Bible. E.T. London 1972 Gittin Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica Hebrew Union College Annual Albert Huck, Syrtopse der drei ersten Evangelien. Tubingen 1922 G. Fohrer, Introduction to the Old Testament. London 1968 Journal of Biblical Literature I. Elbogen, Der jiidische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung. 3e. Frankfurt 1931 Journal of Jewish Studies Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Theological Studies G. F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: the Age of the Tannaim. London 1926 Kerygma Petrou The Septuagjnt: the Greek translation of the O.T. and Apocrypha Megillan Mekilta Midrash

MLM

M. D. Goulder, Midrash and Lection in Matthew: The

NEB Ned.

Speaker's Lectures in Biblical Studies 1969-71. London 1974 New English Bible Nedarim

Nestle-Aland NTS Passio Scil.

Novum Testamentum Graece. 25e. 1963 New Testament Studies Passio Scillitanorum Martyrum

Pes.

Pesahim

PG PL Proc. B.A.

Migne, Patrologia Graeca Migne, Patrologia Latina Proceedings of the British Academy

R. R

Rabbi Rabbah

RAC

T. Klauser (ed.), Reallexikon fur Antike und Christentum.

Ref.

Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies

R.H. S Sanh. SB S-B

Ro'sh Hashshanah Codex Sinaiticus Sanhedrin S. Schulz, Die Stunde der Botschaft. 2e. Hamburg and ZUrich 1970 H. L. Strack & P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen

SL Sof. Taan.

M. Righetti, Storia Liturgica. 3e. Milan 1966 Soferim Ta'anit

TDNT TRL

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament J. Bowker, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature. Cam-

Stuttgart 1966

Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 4e. Munich 1926

bridge 1969 VT

Vetus Testamentum

WI Yeb. Zeb.

H.-J. Kraus, Worship in Israel. E.T. Oxford 1966 Yebamoth Zebahim

Biblical quotations are from the Revised Standard Version (RSV), copyrighted 1946, 1952, 1971, 1973 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, and are used by permission. Where they diverge, they are marked AT (Author's Translation), except where the context indicates that the translation is from the Septuagint.

A CYCLE OF LITURGICAL GOSPELS

To understand an artefact of the ancient world, it is often more useful to ask, 'How was it used?' than to rely upon descriptions or names; for all descriptions carry the peril of anachronism. Holidaying in the Dordogne valley, we may be persuaded to go into one of the palaeolithic caves to admire the paintings: cave paintings—the description is systematically misleading. Our French not being up to the speed of the guide, we stand as if before an earlier Picasso: naive, we feel, but look at the strength of the lines! But then a glance at the guide-book reveals the use: these are not paintings in Picasso's sense at all—these are stone-age man's magic, his attempt to ensure his success at hunting, his first frail effort to control his environment. We look at the paintings again, with a new understanding: the use reveals the thing. Especially must we be wary of descriptions of religious actions and sacred things, lest they mislead us. One misleading description has been the calling of the various biblical units by the term sipher, pipuov, a book: for we handle books daily, and think we know what the word means—a roll, of course, in place of our codex-form, shorter than our books, but of the same species. So people suggest that Theophilus paid for the publishing expenses of Luke-Acts, 1 or that it was intended for the commercial market,2 or wonder under what section it was catalogued by the librarians at Alexandria.3 But a moment's imagination suffices to make such ideas problematic. Did one walk down the Argiletum and say to a bookseller, 'Good morning. A copy of Horace's Satires, please. Oh, and have you The Acts of the Apostles? By Dr Lucas, of Corinth'? How were ancient books advertised? It was often the practice for an author to become known by giving readings in public or at private dinner-parties.4 Did Luke perhaps give readings at dinner-parties? If so, to judge by the general tenor 1

H. Schurmann, Das Lukasevangelium (Freiburg 1969), i, 2. M. Dibelius, Aufsatze zur Apostelgeschichte (4c., GSttingen 1961), p. 118; H. von Campenhausen, The Formation of the Christian Bible [FCB} (1968, E.T. London 1972), p. 128 n. * C. F. Evans, 'What kind of a book is a Gospel?', in A Source Book of the Bible, ed R. C. Walton (London 1970), pp. 239 ff. 4 Juvenal; Sat. 1.1; 3.9; 8.126; Pliny, Ep. 7.17.1, etc. 1

l

of the Gospel at least—the Septuagintal style, for example, the assumed background of Jewish ways, the stress upon perseverance and the danger of apostasy1—they will have been Christian dinnerparties; and Christian dinner-parties sound like church services. So although Luke may, with his posh Greek preface and his Jesus-was-innocent tendency, have had an eye to the Argiletum, his book is likely to have taken shape within the Church; and that is how we find it being used fifty years later, when Justin, who often uses Luke, says that the memoirs of the apostles, and of those who accompanied them, were read at Sunday services.2 The use suggests the intention: perhaps the Gospel was first meant for church reading. The reference to Theophilus bears this out, for he had been instructed (KC(TTIXT)0TI<;) in the faith. 3 How natural for him, and for the many friends of God behind him who perhaps could not read, or afford a copy of the book, to hear the challenge to faithfulness, poverty and humility, in the context of weekly worship! Two other pieces of evidence bear this out. Mark calls his book 'the Gospel' (1.1), and the term stuck. Why 'the Gospel'? The word goes back to Paul and before: 'I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received (). For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received . . . ' (1 Cor. 15.1, 3). The gospel is thus the outline of the good news about Jesus which is delivered and received; delivered, that is, by a Christian teacher, and received by the Church. At first the good news is taught in a Christian gathering, from memory; with time it expands and takes on a more set form; at last it is written down and read out—or so the continuity of the name would seem to imply. Names, as I have said, are not trustworthy; but little more than a decade separates 1 Corinthians from Mark, and it is not easy to see 1

2 3

S. Brown, Apostasy and Perseverance in the Theology of Luke (Rome 1969). The Church context is allowed by Dibelius—'nicht nur fttr die christliche Gemeinde bestimmt (), sondern auch fur den Buchermarkt'—and is evident: cf. E. Trocm6, Le 'Livre des Actes' et I'histoire (Paris 1967), p. 48. "The memoirs of the apostles', I Apol. 67; 'and of those who accompanied them', Dial. 103.8. The more plainly Luke-Acts is seen to assume Christian commitment, and to be concerned with intra-Church issues like the admission of Gentiles, the more evident is it that Karnxetv means 'instruct' and not 'inform' at 1.4. Trocm6, p. 49, argues that this meaning is invariable throughout the N.T.— not only (as is clear) at Rom. 2.18; 1 Cor. 14.19; Gal. 6.6 (x 2); Acts 18.25; but also in Acts 21.21, 24, where the Jewish Christians have been instructed by their leaders about Paul's teaching. When Luke wishes to say 'inform', he uses £n(t>avi£eiv five times in the later chapters of Acts. So also G. Klein, 'Lukas 1, 1-4 als theologisches Programm*, in E. Dinkier (ed.), Zeit und Geschichte (Tubingen 1964), p. 213; cp. H. W. Beyer, TDNTiii, 638-40.

why Mark should have thought of his work as 'the Gospel' unless, like Paul's gospel, it was delivered and received in the Christian community. 1 Secondly, we have six set-piece books in the New Testament: the four Gospels, Acts and Revelation. Although Revelation is so different in content and tone from the others, it is of similar length and date, and the burden is surely on those who deny a similar method of publication. Now, Revelation was written to be read out in church, for in the Proem it is said, 'Blessed is he who reads aloud (6 dvocyxv(BCTK(ov) the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear . . .' (1.3 RSV). The reader is mentioned alongside the hearers; the context is plainly a Christian assembly. We have the same background even more specifically in Hermas, of the same genre (Vis. 2.4). Hermas and the Elders are to read the vision in church, while two other copies are to be made, one for Grapte to instruct the widows and orphans, the other for Clement to send to the cities without. The passage is suggestive for the context of writing down a Gospel: the catechists would need one, especially as daughter-churches came to be founded. The presence of a reader (6 AvotYivdxTWDv) in the church is evident from these passages and from 1 Tim. 4.13 (TQ dvayvdwei), and has led to the suggestion that 6 dvoryiv(BOK(Dv in Mark 13.14 is the public lector of Mark, who is to understand and warn his hearers.2 If Luke, then, were read in church by the evangelist's intention, how would this be done? All at one sitting? Well, hardly: more likely a bit each week. The Gospel is too long, and too rich. Later use, again our trembling guide, suggests subdivision. In our first knowledge of church readings, the Gospels are subdivided, a liturgical 'Gospel' to each Sunday or ferial day, as they are to this day. But a more difficult and more interesting question follows: Would the bits be taken at random, at the choice of the reader, or would they be read serially, starting this Sunday where we left off last? That is a conundrum, for Luke himself leaves us in two minds, when he tells of Jesus reading Isaiah in the synagogue at Nazareth, whether he found Isa. 61 because that was what he wanted to read, or whether he found it because that was where the marker (yadh) was. All Luke 1 1

cf. von Campenhausen, FCB, pp. 105 ff. O. Michel, 'Evangelium', in T. Klauser (ed.), Reallexikon fiir Antike und Christentum [RAC], vi (Stuttgart 1966), coll. 1142 f., argues that it is easier to think that the Foremass was taken over from Judaism directly, rather than inserted later; and reading and readers would come with it. The Epistles were intended for public reading, and almost the same wording occurs in Eph. 3.4 as in Mark 13.14, 6uva
says is (4.17), 'He opened the book and found the place where it was written,.. .\ and we can take it either way. Four considerations would incline us to think that in the earliest times the Gospel of Luke was read serially rather than eclecticaDy. First, the Jewish Law has been read serially for at least 1800 years. Having spoken of the special readings for four of the last five sabbaths in the year, the Mishnah says, 'On the fifth they revert to the set order. At all these times they break off (from the set order in the reading of the Law): on new moons . . A1 Less than a century separates Luke from the writing down of the Mishnah, which is the codification of established uses; so the synagogues from which the Church grew are likely to have been familiar with a pattern of serial reading. The earlier development of the Jewish reading cycle will concern us in the next chapter. Although Christianity often saw itself as a radical movement away from Judaism doctrinally, it is noticeable that breakaway religious movements, such as Anglicanism, Lutheranism, or Methodism, tend to be rather conservative in matters of worship. Second, it has become clear2 that serial reading, lectio continua, was universal in the early patristic period. The sermons of Origen cover whole O.T. books in a way that virtually requires serial reading; and on occasion they are said to be read fc^tl?.3 Egeria makes it plain that Matt. 24-28 were read on successive days in Holy Week in Jerusalem about 380.4 Augustine refers to the hitherto continuous reading of St John, now interrupted by Holy Week.5 The Armenian lectionary,6 from about 430, has readings for Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent in steady series, the former from Exodus and Joel, the latter from Deuteronomy, Job, and Isa. 40-47. In the Syrian churches about 480,7 the numerous readings from the Writings, Law, Prophets, Epistles and Gospels are all in series. The Greek Lectionary, even though our MS evidence is late,8 is serial throughout or both Epistles and Gospels. The Old Galiican lectionaries of the 1

Meg. 3.4, H. Danby's translation and parenthesis, p. 205. M. Righetti, Storia Liturgica [5X) (3e„ Milan 1966), iii, 235 ff.; O. Michel, 'Evangelium', RAC col. 1146. 3 Horn, in I Libr. Regn., PG 12.1011, cited below, pp. 108f. 4 chs. 35-38. * In tpist. Johann. ad Parthos, prolog., PL 35.1977. * Dom A. Renoux, 'Un manuscrit du vieux lectionnaire armfoien de Jerusalem', Le Museon, 74 (1961), 361-85. 7 BM Add. 14528, cf. F. C. Burkitt, 'The Early Syriac Lectionary System', from Prae. B.A. xi (1923). • F. H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (4e., London 1894), pp. 80 ff. 1

5th-6th centuries1 consist of lectio continua broken by festal Propers. Even the old Roman Gospel lections, long believed to have no trace of serial reading left,2 have now been seen to contain, interwoven but in order, series of seven or eight readings from each of the three Synoptics, for the Sundays and feriae after Epiphany.3 So both the institution from which the first-century Church grew, and the institution into which the first-century Church grew, show strong evidence of serial reading. There is a third, more general, consideration. To the Jews the Torah was the word of God, and it was essential for everyone to know the word of God so th^t he could do it Only consider Josiah's dismay (2 Kings 22.11 ff.) when he heard of the discovery of the roll of the Law in the Temple: ignoratio Legis neminem excusat.

Now, there is no surer way of leaving some parts of the Law unread than to pick and choose on each sabbath: if all is vital, all must be read, and the only methodical way is to read in series. The Church did not value the Gospel less than the Jews did the Law: the Lord's words were life and truth, and it would be worth while putting up with the Genealogy once a year, if that is how you think of it, to be sure of missing none of their other treasures. So it would seem psychologically as well as circumstantially probable that the Church read Luke's Gospel in series; and I have argued in the first volume of my Speaker's Lectures4 that the same is true of Matthew's Gospel. Finally, there is a somewhat banausic but practical point It appears from the account in Luke 4 that Jesus—and therefore presumably any visiting preacher in synagogue or church—was given the scroll without his having given prior warning of the text of his address. Now, on the understanding of the passage which takes it that Jesus chose his own reading, we are able to make a rough computation of how long it would take him to find Isa. 61. The Isaiah A scroll at Qumran, which is near to contemporary, was 7.34 metres (about 24 ft) in length. Scrolls were wound forwards, the reader unrolling with the right hand and rolling up with the left; and it would be necessary to begin from the beginning.5 Thus, 1

Alban Dold, 'Das Slteste Liturgiebuch der Iateinischen Kirche', Texte und Arbeiten (Beuron 1936), I pt., Fasc. 26-8; J. Mabillon, De Liturgia Gallicana (Paris 1685), pp. 106-73; Ximenes, Missale Mixtion, PL 85 and 86; cf. E. Werner, The Sacred Bridge (London and New York 1959), pp. 61 f. 2 A. Fortescue, The Mass (New York 1922), p. 259. 1 T. Klauser, Das ramische Capitulare Evangeliorum (Miinster 1935), pp. 13 i t , Righetti, SL iii, 237. 4 Midrash and Lection in Matthew [.MLM] (London 1974). * O. R. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls (Oxford 1965), pp. 23 ff.; cf. A. Biichler, 'The Reading of the Law and Prophets in a Triennial Cycle', JQRvi(l893), 12f.

to reach Isa. 61 one would have to unroll more than twenty feet. Experiments show that a man with strong wrists can unroll a foot of scroll in about six seconds, so that the operation would take three minutes, or more if he could not be sure of finding his place. It is difficult to believe that such a delay would be tolerable; and something similar would be true of Luke, whose scroll would, pro rata, be about four metres in length. Where do such questions lead us? I began by suggesting that the use of an ancient artefact is our best clue to the designer's intentions. We may, of course, be misled, but at least it is worth while asking the question: If Luke's Gospel may quite likely have been read as a series of stories, could it have been developed as a series of stories? Rather in the same way as this book was written as a series of Speaker's Lectures: only, in Luke's case, it would have begun not as a series of readings, because we are speaking of a time before it was written down, but as a series of recitals, in liturgical order, of Jesus' words and deeds. For clearly, if it was developed like this before it was written down, it would be natural to use it like this after it had been written down. Certainly this would explain one or two features of the Synoptic Gospels. The Form-critics have so inured us to the concept of a pericope that we no longer wonder at the absence of real connection between one and the next: well, that would be explained if one pericope were the 'lesson' for one week, and the next pericope for the next. All three Gospels end with an Apocalyptic Discourse, and a full account of the Passion, in which much of Passover Day is divided into three-hour units: these would make excellent readings for the preparation and vigil of Passover; and, as I have said, they were being used like this when first the curtain lifts for us on church lectionary practice. And there are other matters to which we shall come in due course. But what sort of liturgical series would a Gospel be? Perhaps I can make my meaning plain by means of a modern parallel—not an historical one. Let us imagine the situation in the French village of Ars in the last century after the death of the famous cur6 JeanBaptiste Vianney. No doubt the stories of his wonderful life would be told in private houses by pious Catholics, but the perpetuation of these stories would owe most, we may think, to the Sermon at Mass. We can picture the new curd preaching on the fourth Sunday in Lent, on the Feeding of the Five Thousand: 'You yourselves will remember, my brothers in Christ, how our own saint was called to the orphanage in the days of the famine, and prayed; and the nuns

went at his word to open the loft door, and the corn ran down the ladder.' The attempt of Jesus to escape from the crowds would recall the old curd's attempt to flee the village; Jesus' nights of prayer, his vigils; Jesus' dying words, his dying words; and so on. As a cult of the saint formed, so it could happen that year after year these stories would be told in the same order, until a generation unfamiliar with the historical sequence of the saint's life would be apt to take the liturgical sequence as the historical one. None of this happened, I dare say, at Ars: but something very like it did, I believe, happen at Corinth, or wherever Luke's church was in Greece. Luke developed his Gospel in preaching to his congregation, as a series of fulfilments of the O.T.; and this development in liturgical series explains the basic structure of his Gospel, which has been a riddle so long. My illustration at Ars is apocryphal; but it would not be hard to lay one's finger on an historical instance of the same thing. The Didascalia Apostolorum is a manual of church order produced in Syria in the third century; it is in intention, and usually in fact, faithful to the Gospels, especially Matthew; but it has an interesting deviation in its chronology of the Passion. This is not due to an attempt to reconcile the Synoptics with John, for John is scarcely quoted throughout the book, and the chronology corresponds with neither Gospel tradition. Nor is it probable, as has been maintained,1 that the chronology of the Didascalia is historical, and that all the four Gospels are wrong. On Monday, say the 'Apostles', while Jesus is at the house of Simon the leper, the chief priests assemble and decide to seize him and to keep the Passover on Tuesday. Jesus celebrates the Passover on Tuesday. He is arrested on the night of Tuesday/Wednesday, and passes Wednesday in the house of Caiaphas. On Thursday he is brought to Pilate and accused, and then imprisoned in Pilate's house. On Friday he is crucified, on Saturday he is in the tomb and on Sunday he rises from the dead. Applied to Matthew's Gospel, this gives the following table: Sunday

Matt. (24)—26.2,

Monday

26.3-16:

Tuesday Wednesday

26.17-46: 26.47-68:

1

ending with Jesus' warning, 'You know that after two days the Passover is coming . . . ' The Priests' Plot, Simon the Leper's House, Judas' Assignation Passover Meal, Gethsemane Arrest, Trial by Sanhedrin

A. Jaubert, Date de la Cine (Paris 1957), 'Le Mercredi oil J&us fut livrt', NTS 14.2, 145-64.

Thursday

26.69—27.10: (Peter's Denial) Jesus brought to Pilate (Judas' Death) Friday 27.11-56: Accusation before Pilate, Crucifixion1 Such a table at once prompts the reflection, What a happy chronology, which provides a suitable reading for each day in Holy Week! The Didascalia belongs to the century when the Church was moving from keeping Passover-and-Easter to observing Holy Week. All that is left of Passover is a fast.2 The liturgical problem thus created has been solved by spreading the Passion readings over Holy Week. The acceptance of this as a fixed liturgical order has passed over to the belief that it reflects the actual historical order. Hence a marked defensiveness shown in emphasizing the days on which the successive events purported to have occurred3—not surprisingly, as so little of it fits with the unforced Gospel story! Something similar happened with Christmas Day, which was adopted to be the feast of the Birth of Jesus, perhaps by Constantine, and was rapidly believed to be the date on which his birth occurred.4 Such a process would seem to be plausible in itself as a suggestion for the milieu in which the Gospel grew to its present form. But it is n o t merely a plausible suggestion: it is what Luke himself says that

he is doing in his Prologue. He begins his work, 'Since many have undertaken to order (dvaTd^aoOai) a narrative of the things which have been brought to fulfilment among us . . ., it seemed good to me also, having followed everything accurately alongside (KapTpooXou8T|K6Ti) from the beginning, to write to you in order (ca8e5flc), most excellent Theophilus . . . ' (AT). There are several important things which Luke states in this exordium, but the most ineluctable is his stress upon order. Luke uses K«8B^ five times, always meaning 'in series'. 'It happened £v x<J> Ka8e£f|<;, after this' (8.1, AT); 'All the prophets, from Samuel and tfflv Ka8e$fi<;, those who came afterwards' (Acts 3.24); Peter 'explained to them icaSe^s, in order' (Acts 11.4); Paul 'went KaGe^fl?, from place to place through the region of Galatia and Phrygia' (Acts 18.23). Three times it is a temporal series, once it is a geographical series. Jesus' life was a series of incidents, and the next after his Anointing (Luke 7.36 ff.) 1

Didasc., ch. xxi, in Horae Semiticae, tr. M. D. Gibson (London 1903), if, 94-101. Those incidents not mentioned by the Didascalia I have put in parentheses. 2 ch. xxi (ed. cit.), p. 100. 1 cf. Jaubert, art. cit., p. 150, 'Visiblement la Didascalie defend une thdse'. 4 J. A. Jnngmann, The Early Liturgy (E.T. London 1960), p. 148. In the Chronograph of 354 it is noted: 'Vm Kal. Jan. natus Christus in Betleem Judaeae'.

was the extension of his mission (&1). There is in Scripture a series of prophets beginning with Samuel (in the Former Prophets), all of whom in turn prophesied of the time of Messiah. Peter recounted to the Church the series of incidents which had ended in the preaching to Cornelius. Paul visited each of the Galatian churches along the road in series, without deviation. In almost every instance that we have of the word in contemporary secular literature the meaning is the same.1 Luke uses the related word five times (7.11, 9.37, Acts 21.1, 25.17, 27.18), each time with the similar meaning 'next*. Now, all this is particularly significant because the whole emphasis of Luke's elaborate opening period falls upon the word KaWftc. 'Since many have undertaken . . . E8o£e xdnoi, 7tatpr|KoX.ou&r|K6Ti fivwflev jtamv dxpifkfr;, Korfte^fte aoi ypdvoti, Kp&twrre ©e6tte'. After the long ijteiSnnep clause comes Luke's decision, E8o£e Kdjiot; before the substance of the decision comes his qualification for taking it, napnicoftvroOev itftcnv dxptPffi?; now the rabbit is out of the hat, ica6e!;fte aoi Tpdvjrai. KaQs^fjg is in the emphatic position preceding the verb.2 The central point that Luke wishes to put over is that his account of Jesus is an account in order. The problem is, What order can it be that Luke is undertaking to provide? To an earlier generation of commentators the answer was plain: a chronological order. 3 Of the four, Luke was the Greek historian: Luke set the Gospel in the context of Tiberius and Pilate, of Quirinius and the Census; Luke wrote the Acts. But such an answer will not convince us now. What sort of a Greek history is it which moves from the Prologue to two chapters whose indebtedness to the O.T. is evidenced in every verse? The order is no whit more chronological than Mark's: in fact it is the Marcan order. When Luke deserts it, as in the Rejection at Nazareth (4.16-30), he involves himself in contradictions: the crowd asks Jesus to repeat miracles done at Capernaum, where Luke has not yet taken him. When he 1

M. Volkel, 'Exegetische Erwagungen zum Verstandnis des Begriffs KaOe^fi? im lukanischen Prolog', NTS 20.3 (1974), 289-99, discusses eight instances, and justifies the translation 'continua serie' for seven of these, and for all the Lucan uses. He differentiates by the translation 'deinde', but the distinction is rather fine: compare 7.11 with 8.1. 2 This is widely agreed. An exception is S. Schulz, Die Stunde der Botschaft [SSI (2e., Hamburg and Zurich 1970), pp. 243 ff., who takes Kct9e£fi<; with the participle. This means that the participle is modified by three successive adverbs, which must be unparalleled in Luke; and that the main verb is prefaced by an enclitic, aoi. 3 A chronological order is maintained among recent commentators by J. M. Creed, N. Geldenhuys and K. H. Rengstorf, without apology. Schiirmann thinks Luke intended to claim no more than the Marcan order; but this seems to deprive the sentence of all point.

leaves Mark for a protracted period for the Long Journey, there is not the least sign that Luke thought he was improving Mark's chronology. The Journey is not a chronological exercise, but an amorphous mass of heterogeneous material. The Lucan Jesus cries Woe to Bethsaida for its coming rejection of the Seventy just after he has left Galilee for Jerusalem (10.13, cf. 9.51); and he weeps over Jerusalem while still seventy miles away (13.34 f., note the bathetic 35b). If Luke meant that he had taken trouble to provide a chronological order, then he has promised goods which he cannot deliver; and this is a conclusion which exegetes have been reluctant to admit. A number of alternative theories have therefore been tried, to escape this conclusion: that KaOE^ffc means something different from 'in order'; or that some kind of theological order is in view. H. J. Cadbury, whose 'Commentary on the Preface to Luke' 1 remains the classic examination of the piece, lays down the entirely proper principle that each word should be interpreted in the light first of Lucan, and second of wider, usage. However, when he comes to Kaes^fj? his nerve gives way. The word, he claims, can mean 'successively', or 'continuously', and 'need not imply accordance with some fixed order'; but in the other instances in Luke-Acts it clearly does imply accordance with a fixed historical or geographical order. Cadbury actually wishes to translate 'hereinafter, below' (p. 505) in line with the meaning of 4£fl<;, fefreSflc, in certain papyri; now against the Lucan use not only of KaGeSfic, but of i^fi; as well. The words are not interchangeable; and if there were fifty uses of KotGeSfls in this sense, the climactic position of the word would still make it impossible—'I decided, having followed everything accurately from the beginning, as follows to write to you.' Two modern translations, the products of groups of scholars, similarly take KotfleSfis not to mean 'in order'. RSV translates: 'to write an orderly account'; NEB: 'to write a connected narrative'. The former is even a morally dubious translation because there is no instance of KotOe^; meaning 'orderly', and a suggestion of respectability seems to stem from the similarity of the English root. But order and orderliness are not the same. NEB reduces Luke's meaning to verbiage, for all narratives are connected. This does not show it to be wrong, for Luke is not above writing verbiage, but, as with Cadbury, the translation founders on the rock of the sentence's emphasis. 'The others have made an a t t e m p t . . . I decided to write a connected narrative'?? Of the proposals of theological order, perhaps the most widely 1

In Foakes- Jackson & Lake (eds), The Beginnings of Christianity (London 1922), ii, 489-510.

considered are those of E. Trocmd, G. Klein and E. Lohse.1 Trocmd2 suggests that Luke is contrasting the Marcan order with his own in that (i) Luke omits the Marcan account of the evangelization of the Gentiles (Mark 6.45—8.26, the Long Omission), and (ii) Luke tells the latter story in Acts, where it forms the crown of his united work. This is not very convincing. Mark 6.45—8.26 contains much material which has nothing to do with the Gentile Mission, including everything from 6.45 to 7.23; and it is notoriously difficult to justify a Gentile reference for almost anything except 7.24-30. Trocmd himself accounts for many of the omissions elsewhere as made for a different reason, namely, Luke's 'critical' spirit, which removes the second Feeding, for example. Moreover, if Luke wished to keep the Gentile Mission theme for Acts, why did he include the Gentile Centurion's story at 7.1 ff? Klein3 also turns the contrast implicit in ica8e5f|<; partly by including Acts. The 'many', e.g. Mark, had made an attempt at putting into writing the apostolic account of the events, dn' dpxfls, beginning from John's baptism and on to the resurrection (cf. Acts 1.21 f., etc.). Luke himself has sought out the whole matter (naoiv) from the beginning (fivroGev) at John's conception, and has decided to write it section by section ('Stuck fur Stiick') in its three theological steps—the Birth stories, the ministry of Jesus, the history of the Church. So Theophilus will know the certainty of the teaching of Luke's predecessors in which he has been instructed; for they accepted the apostolic witness, while he has studied the facts himself, which alone can yield such certainty. This looks contrived. Surely dit'dpxflcand dvcoOev are synonyms, not in contrast; cf. Acts 11.15; Matt. 19.8. The strong sense of nftcnv (which has become td ndvto on p. 216!) is at variance with Luke's common loose use of the word. How could Luke see the three great theological phases as 'completed' with Paul's arrival at Rome? How are his researches into the Birth stories supposed to be more dependable than the apostolic 1

1 leave out H. Conzelmann's proposals in Die Mitte der Zeit (Tubingen 1953; E.T. The Theology of St Luke, London 1960) as I have already criticized them elsewhere, Type and History in Acts (London 1964), pp. 142 ff. E. E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke (London 1966), pp. 29 ff., suggests a series of 'logical' divisions—the Infancy Stories, Jesus' Messiahship, twenty-four acts of Messiah, the Journey, Jerusalem—but the breaks are unclear, even to Ellis, and the contrast with Luke's predecessors obscure. Volkel (see n. 28) also takes Koe8e£fi<; as meaning logical order, on the strength of a discrepancy between Peter's account in Acts 11 and the narrative in Acts 10. Luke is too naive for such subtle treatment—he thought he had told the same story twice! 2 op. cit., pp. 46 f. s 'Lukas 1, 1-4 als theologisches Programm' (see note 7, above), pp. 193-216; followed by S. Schulz, SB, pp. 243-50.

tradition of die ministry? Where is the parallel between &von6£a06at and Kofegft; gone, with the former reduced to 'auszeichnen'? Above all, how can K O c a r r y so much weight? It is simply not true to say that it refers 'less to the ordering than to the compass of the material' (p. 211). To say, 'They tried to write out the historia Jesu: / am giving you the whole story section by section', would leave the reader completely in the dark—was not Mark's story also told KotGe^fis: John's baptism, the ministry, the cross, the resurreotion? Lohse 1 understands Kcefle^fj? to mean 'in geographical order'. Both Gospel and Acts follow a sequence in which geographical divisions suggest theological purpose. In the Gospel 1.5—3.20 describes the coming of John Baptist, the end of the old covenant (Luke 16.16); then 3.21—9.50 covers Jesus' Galilaean mission; 9.51—19.10, his Way to Jerusalem; 19.11—24.52, the Jerusalem mission culminating in the Passion and Resurrection: the book ends, as it began, in the Temple. Acts 1.8 sets out the progression from Jerusalem to Rome which the story is to follow. Each section of the Gospel begins with a rejection of Jesus, symbolizing the cross; each has an adumbration of the Gentile mission. Lohse's sections are thus shorter than Klein's—four in the Gospel alone, where Klein has three over all. He has not, however, carried many commentators with him; and this, I think, for two reasons. First, it seems rather unnatural to use the phrase 'to write to you in order', meaning a geographical order, without precisely specifying so. Luke says that Paul went through the towns in order (Acts 18.23), but then he is talking of towns. Indeed, the whole notion of writing a story in geographical order seems somewhat strange. But secondly, even so we are in the same predicament vis-a-vis Mark as we were with the chronological order. Despite Lohse's correct point that Luke mentions John's imprisonment earlier than Mark, the fact remains that Mark, like Luke, divides Jesus' mission into three geographical units (if one chooses to look at it so): Mark 1—9, Galilee (and briefly beyond); Mark 10, the Way to Jerusalem; Mark 11—16, the Jerusalem mission, with the Passion and Resurrection. So in fact Lohse, no less than the old chronological school, loses the contrast with Luke's predecessors. If none of these solutions proves convincing, perhaps my Curd d'Ars suggestion is worthy of consideration. Why should KoeG^g not mean 'in liturgical order'? Such an exegesis would have two 1

E. Lohse, 'Lukas als Theologe der Heilsgeschichte', Evangelisehe Theologie 14 (1954-5), 256-75; followed by W. Grundmann, Das EvangeUttm nach Lukas (6e., Berlin 1971), p. 2.

j

'

'

i

immediate merits: it safeguards the 'order' meaning of the word, and it makes sense of Luke's emphasis. He has decided to revise the work of his predecessors, and to provide a series erf" pericopae which will fit the year in order. It also makes sense of two other features of the Prologue: the ordering of the earlier Gospels, and the Gospel as the fulfilment of Scripture. Every commentator notes that Luke has been at pains to balance his opening sentence in an approved rhetorical way: 'Since m a n y . . . it seemed good to me also', 'eyewitnesses &n' dpxffc . . . all things OvmOev', etc. Is there a word in the opening clause to balance ko8e$ffc? Indeed there is: dvoexdSaoflai means 'to order fully', 'to arrange'. 1 Irenaeus says that when the Scriptures had been corrupted, God inspired Ezra to set in proper order (dvatd^aoeoi) all the words erf"the prophets. 2 Plutarch uses the term to mean 'to rehearse in proper order'. 3 It is true that it is used by Athanasius with the more general meaning 'to compile',4 and has other meanings in pagan authors, 5 but the root meaning of the word is 'to order', and the balance with Koriteijfic shows plainly that this is the meaning here. Others—Mark, Matthew (perhaps more, but we cannot trust Luke's noXXot too far®) —have undertaken to order a narrative: he has decided to make a thorough job of it, providing Gospel fulfilments for the liturgical themes of feast and Sunday for virtually the whole year. The relation of the Gospel to the Scriptures of the Old Testament is a theme not omitted from the Prologue either. A Gospel is not a list of things which Jesus did: it is an account of the things which have been brought to fulfilment among us.7 It is the things which Jesus did, seen as the fulfilment of the O.T. Where do the stories come from? Well, ultimately of course from eyewitnesses, but the 1

G. Delling, TDNT, viii, 32 f. Adv. Haereses, iii, 21.2. Moralia, 968C. 4 39th Festival Letter. ' See H. J. Cadbury, art. cit., and in JBL 52 (1933), 56-8; W. C. van Unnik, 'Once More St Luke's Prologue', Neotestamentica 7 (1973), 12 f. * It occurs in a pleonastic sense, for example, in the opening verses of both speeches in Acts 24. 1 Cadbury, loc. cit., takes rcX.r|poopETv to mean 'complete', not 'fulfil'. The word is found only here in Luke, but Cadbury shows that Luke is fond of -$opstv compounds, which serve to add dignity. nXripoCv itself has to mean 'complete', not 'fulfil', only at 7.1; while it has to mean 'fulfiT, not 'complete', at 1.20; 4.21; 22.16; 24.44; cf. also 9.51. Klein also translates 'complete' on the grounds that TtpdYpcna requires such a meaning, pp. 196 f.: but Jesus' exodus is to be fulfilled at 9.31, and Passover will be fulfilled at 22.16, cf. also Acts 14.26; 19.21. Trocmi (op. cit., p. 46) observes that x. includes 'accomplissement' as the most 'noble' sense for a grand word. 1 J

eyewitness accounts have been mediated in preaching: 'just as they were delivered to us by the original (dw' dpxfls, AT) eyewitnesses and ministers of the word'. 'The word' in Luke means the Gospel as preached: the stories have come by the mouth of preachers, often themselves the eyewitnesses. In the only service for which we know the lesson in Luke's writings, that at Nazareth in Luke 4, the sermon expounds the reading, Isa. 61; and the readings, and the exposition of them, are mentioned several times by Luke as the people's normal means of instruction—'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them' (Luke 16.29, 31), 'From early generations Moses has had in every city those who preach him, for he is read every sabbath in the synagogues' (Acts 15.21). Sermons on the Scriptures read were the traditional Jewish use: 'Moses laid down a rule for the Israelites that they should enquire and give expositions concerning the subject of the day'. 1 In view of this, and of Luke's unwearying claims of Christ as the fulfilment of law and prophets (and psalms), it is easy to believe that the ministers of the word related those deeds and words of Jesus which were suggested by the Scriptures liturgically read. Although there is no reference to any readings of Scripture either in 1 Cor. 14 or in Acts 20, the descriptions of Christian services included in these chapters are only partial, and we should not necessarily expect readings to be mentioned. Paul does, however, seem to imply a reading of the Torah in 2 Cor. 3.14 ff.: 'To this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds; but when a man turns to the Lord the veil is removed.' 2 Knowledge of Scripture is assumed by Paul: 'Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, . . . ?' (1 Cor. 9.13). He had taught the Corinthians to appropriate the O.T.—'Our fathers were all under the cloud . . ( 1 0 . 1 ) — a n d in all his letters he drew on wide areas of Scripture for his argument, treating them as a shared authority with which he expected his churches to be familiar. Such appropriation and such authority are scarcely explicable without the assumption of liturgical reading. Our first open reference to the liturgical use of the O.T. in church is in the Pastorals, that is, like Luke, in the Deutero-Pauline communities, and probably within twenty years of the Gospel: 'Till I come, attend to the public reading of scripture (tfl dvayvcbaei), to 1 2

b Meg. 32a. Michel, col. 1142, where Rom. 1S.4 is also taken as a text suggesting the same.

preaching, to teaching' (1 Tim. 4.13).1 This is a very convenient text, for the implication is that the readings were followed by exhortation and exposition in the liturgy. This is stated by Justin: 'The memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs and exhorts to the imitation of these good things' (/ Apol. 67). The Gospel now has its place alongside the O.T. reading, and the sermon is said to expound the lection, the same two verbs being used as in 1 Tim.2 In Justin's later contemporary, Hegesippus, a three-part canon is assumed as universal: 'In every city that which the Law and the Prophets and the Lord preach is faithfully followed'.3 'The Lord' here must mean the Gospel: 'preach' (iciipoaaei) implies a public proclamation. Later use shows at least one O.T. lesson as universal until the sixth century.4 Thus everything points, however tentatively, to the conclusion that the Church continued the Jewish practice of readings from Law and Prophets, followed by an expounding sermon; and that the expounding sermon in time gave birth to the liturgical Gospel. There is one final possibility latent in the Prologue. Luke says that the basis for his own undertaking is that he has followed everything accurately alongside from the beginning (JI<XPIIKOX.OO0T|K6TI fivmGev nfioiv dtcpipa*;). W. C. van Unnik has shown that there is an instance in Josephus of the word icapaicoX.ouBetv meaning 'to acquaint oneself with',5 so there is no reason why the phrase should not be just the stock Greek historian's claim to know the facts. But the verb is used in a number of senses, and the Greek could equally easily mean, 'having followed all the Old Testament parallels accurately from Genesis on'. Such a translation would be speculative, but it would have the advantage of providing the best possible basis for writing a Gospel in liturgical order: and if it makes the best sense, it should not be excluded. We thus have an understanding of the Prologue which makes sense of every word—and further makes sense of the fact that Luke has plainly drawn the details of Luke 1.5—2.52 not from eyewitnesses, 1

The Pastorals are sometimes dated about 150—cf. von Campenhausen, FCB, p. 181. But they are cited several times in Polycarp's Letter, which appears to have been written soon after Ignatius' martyrdom. Liturgical reading of the O.T. is the natural background of 2 Tim. 3.15 also, 'From childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings . . . All scripture is inspired by God'. 2 There is a discussion of the use in Justin's church below, p. 53. 3 ap. Eusebius, H.E., iv.22.3. 4 Michel, coll. 1144-8; Righetti, SL, pp. 239 f. 5 art. cit., p. 16.

but from the Scriptures. The contrast which he is drawing is, I shall suggest, fully borne out by an examination of the texts. Mark and Matthew did both undertake a rough liturgical ordering of the Gospel material. Mark (as I shall argue in ch. 9) made a first attempt at a liturgical series of stories, running from New Year in October round to Easter. Matthew provided a full year's readings, running from after Easter round to Easter, but concentrating on the Jewish festivals, being so Jewish a Gospel.1 They did both undertake to draw up a series, but their series were incomplete. Mark started in October, and what is the use of that? Six-and-a-half-month calendars have no sale; Luke followed everything through fivcoGev, from the beginning of the cycle. Matthew's stress on Jewish festivals is equally inadequate for a Gentile church. It is the fulfilments of the Sunday-by-Sunday readings2 which count, every one taken accurately in order: for only so can it be seen that no jot of the law has fallen, only so can Theophilus have certain knowledge, based partly upon eyewitnesses, and partly on the infallible word of God, of the full Gospel story to which he has been introduced.

In my apocryphal example of the life of the Curd d'Ars, I supposed that the stories of the saint's life were told in parallel with the Gospel at Mass; and in that case the real nature of such a life could be immediately exposed by anyone familiar with the order of the Gospels in the Roman Missal. The reason that the real nature of St Luke's Gospel has not been exposed long since is that Luke did not use the Roman Missal; and we do not have any copy of the lectionary that he did use. Our first task, therefore, is to reconstruct the system of readings which were in use in the West, that is in Palestine and the Diaspora of the Roman Empire, in Luke's day, and this is no inconsiderable labour: it will occupy us in the next chapter and through chapters 4, 6 and 7. But before I begin to unravel this tangled skein, it may be of some assistance to my readers to know where the argument is leading. Courses of biblical lectures are not detective stories whose denouement must be reserved to the last page. I shall therefore now set out starkly the conclusions to which I see my study as tending; and those whose reading time is limited can move on to the last chapter direct. 1 2

MLM, ch. 9, with Appendix A. Acts 20.7, 'On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread . . . ' shows that Luke was used to Sunday worship. I take this to signify what we should call Saturday night worship, and have discussed the transition from sabbath to Sunday in MLM, pp. 176-9.

In the first century A.D. the Western synagogue used an annual cycle of lections beginning in Nisan, in the spring. It had not only a fixed cycle of readings of the Law, which consisted of the S4 units which are in use to this day; it had also a series of fixed cycles for the Prophets and for the Writings. These were later broken up, but in Luke's time they were intact, and were used as alto-native cycles of second and third lessons. The Torah was read every year, but there were five alternative cycles of the Prophets—the Former Prophets (that is, Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezckiel, and the Twelve (Minor Prophets). There were also a number of cycles of the Writings, including the work of the Chronicler, the Wisdom of ben-Sira, and a series of shorter books taken together to form a cycle beginning with Daniel and ending with Proverbs. Some latitude was customary in the choice and number of these lessons, but Luke's church was accustomed to hear all the books which I have mentioned, except Ezekiel and perhaps Jeremiah, and the Gospel was developed in the course of expositions of these readings. The Lucan cycle began after the Easter octave, following Matthew, on the fifth Sunday of the Jewish cycle, and it ran round to the Easter octave, following Matthew and Mark. It took up the themes of the Law (Chapter 3), the Histories (Chapter 5), Isaiah and the Twelve (Chapter 6), and the Writings (Chapter 7). The pattern of readings, thus reconstructed and confirmed in Lucan use, will now enable us to take a further look at Matthew, which will be seen to have drawn on the same cycle, especially in the formulacitations; and Matthew will further be seen to show signs of familiarity with a fixed cycle of readings from the Pauline letters (Chapter 8). Finally, we shall be in a position to ask whether the given cycles cast light on the structure of Mark; and I shall argue that the lectionary theory provides a persuasive explanation for the origin and development of the whole Gospel tradition from the 30s on (Chapter

9).

I have not included an account of the liturgical origin of Acts for reasons of economy. I hope one day to do this in a second edition; in the meantime those interested will be in a position to work the cycle out for themselves. Before composing his Gospel, in the days when he simply read Mark, Luke had been wont to illustrate his sermons with stories of the Apostles, and in the course of time these stories also were formed into a continuous cycle, our Acts of the Apostles. Just as the Torah was the classic statement of God's being, activity and will for Israel, and the Prophets and Writings were commentary upon it, displaying God's continuing activity and will for Israel throughout history; so the Gospel was the classic

statement of God's redemptive activity and will for the world, and the Acts displayed his continuing activity in the Church. 'In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach . . . ' : in this follows the continuation in the works of the Spirit. I wish to emphasize finally that I am not claiming that the reconstructed lectionary cycle explains every detail of the structure of each of the three Synoptic Gospels. Mark and Luke were no more bound to preach on the readings of the day every Sunday than a modern vicar (or curd) is bound to preach on the Gospel and Epistle every Sunday. I am obliged to show that there is a higher correlation than that which chance would provide, and there is no difficulty in doing this—more than half the pericopae in Luke are explicable on the basis of the lections, and something similar holds good for Mark. Further, it is a help if divergences from the lections can be explained on plausible ad hoc supplementary hypotheses, and these again are easy to supply: both Matthew and Luke were constrained by the need/desirability of including all the Marcan material, for example, and there is the question of the preparation of catechumens for Easter baptism. So the lectionary theory is not to be expected to solve every problem unaided; but it is my hope that it will be found illuminating—and, indeed, revolutionary.

2 THE TORAH AS AN ANNUAL CYCLE OF READINGS

The manner of Old Testament readings in the synagogues of New Testament times is a complex and controverted question, but not one that is beyond solution. There are three major problems: (1) Did the first-century synagogue have any set system of readings? The Mishnah, as I have said, shows that lectio continua was the rule prescribed in the second century: 'On the fifth (sabbath) they revert to the set order', 1 but we need to know more for our purposes. For the set system might have been part of the Jamnia reforms, and therefore might not have been heard of before the churches broke with Judaism; or it might have been in process of growth in the first century, in which case we should have to reckon with the possibility of untrammelled freedom in those parts of the Diaspora where Pharisaic reformism was not a powerful force. (2) The first Jewish month was Nisan, our April, roughly speaking—'This month shall be for you the beginning of months' (Exod. 12.2): but, for reasons we shall be going into, the ancient autumn New Year in Tishri, our October, was and is celebrated as New Year, Ro'sh Hashshanah. If the year began in Tishri, there is the further complication over the day in Tishri, the 1st, the 15th, 21st, 22nd or 23rd. So the second thing we need to know is whether the lectionary year, if there was one in the first century in the West, began in Nisan or in Tishri; and if the latter, on what day in Tishri. (3) There is a comment in the Babylonian Talmud about 'the people of Palestine who complete the reading of the Pentateuch in three years'.2 As the Babylonian synagogues then (c. A.D. 500), like all Jewish synagogues today, read the Torah in a year, this leaves open whether the system (if any) in Palestine in the first century was annual or triennial. In all, therefore, there are five possible theories, four of which are actual 1

2

Meg. 3.4, cf. above p. 4, note 1. The tractate Megillah ('Scroll') is concerned first with rules for the reading of the scroll of Esther, but other rules on the reading of the Scriptures in general have been appended; and then amplified in the Megillah tractates in the two Talmuds and the Tosefta. b Meg. 29b.

theories, a b o u t the lectionary system in the first-century Western synagogue: (a) t h a t there was freedom, no system, which is the opinion of m a n y non-Jewish scholars; 1 (b) t h a t there was a triennial cycle beginning in Tishri, which was t h e opinion of J. M a n n ; 2 (c) that there was a triennial cycle beginning in Nisan, which was the opinion of A. Biichler; 3 (d) that there was an a n n u a l cycle beginning in Tishri, which is the system obtaining today; a n d (e) t h a t there was an a n n u a l cycle beginning in Nisan, which is the view f o r which I shall argue. T h e triennial-cycle theories have been influential since Biichler wrote in 1893, b u t they were n o t thoroughly examined until Prof. A. Guilding applied them in detail to St J o h n ' s Gospel in I960. 4 They were then criticized, a n d in my view demolished, by Prof. 1

This position has been set out most recently and most fully by Ch. Perrot, La Lecture de la Bible dans la Synagogue (Hildesheim 1973). Perrot's particular theory turns on the 290 p'tubdt and 379 s'tumdt in the Pentateuch, marked in BH with the letters p and s: many of these correspond with edentations in the Dead Sea biblical MSS, and they are therefore ancient. Sometimes they fall close together, especially in passages about priests and Levites, so Perrot suggests that these were the original lections introduced about the Chronicler's time. There would have been almost enough p'tufidt to go round a seven-year period (cf. Deut. 31.9 ff.), and fixed passages, with associated sections from the prophets, could have become traditional. The Jamnia reforms then brought in lectio continua with a minimum of twenty-one verses per sabbath, so that cycles of three years and three and a half years became customary in the second century A.D. The controversy between R. Judah and R. Meir (see below, pp. 56 f.) then issued in the formation of the standard triennial and annual cycles by about 200. The festal readings were fixed later than the sabbath cycles. The origin of the p'tuhdt and s'tumdt is obscure, but Perrot's theory is not very convincing. There are not in fact enough p'tubdt to go round seven years; and although the combined number is very large (669) there are still nine lections in the best testified triennial cycle and one in the annual cycle which do not correspond with either. The growth of traditional set lessons over a seven-year period without lectio continua is a difficult hypothesis. But many of Perrot's conclusions are sound. The Mishnaic festal readings are not ancient: the triennial cycle (his main interest) is to be dated about A.D. 200: its origin is connected with the discussion between R. Meir and R. Judah. 1 The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue [BRPOS], vol. i (Cincinnati 1940), vol. ii, by I. Sonne (1966). 3 The Reading of the Law and the Prophets in a Triennial Cycle', JQR v (1893), 420-68, vi (1894), 1-73. BUchler's system was accepted by many Jewish scholars, at least in outline: it is in the Jewish Encyclopaedia (1901-6) vii, 647 ff.; xii, 254 ff., and in Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem 1972), art. 'Triennial Cycle'. It is criticized and developed by I. Elbogen, Der jiidische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung [JG] (3e., Frankfurt 1931), pp. 155 ff., 540 f. 4 The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship (Oxford 1960).

J. R. Porter, 1 L. Morris, 2 a n d Dr J. Heinemann, 3 a n d I shall n o t repeat their criticisms now. I shall a t t e m p t to trace the development of the lectionary systems, b o t h a n n u a l a n d triennial: we have hints of the use of one or other system in a fair n u m b e r of documents between 6 0 0 B.C. a n d A.D. 5 0 0 , a n d all fit together into a coherent whole. It will be convenient to begin with the second problem set out above, that of the Calendar.

(i) The Calendars In pre-exilic Israel there were three great feasts: Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, a n d Tabernacles. In all five calendars in the O.T.—Exod. 2 3 . 1 0 - 1 9 (?E); Exod. 34.18-26(J); Lev. 23.4-44 (H); N u m . 28—29 (P); Deut. 16.1-17 (D)—the feasts fall in this order, a n d it is evident t h a t before the exile the year ' t u r n e d ' with Tabernacles (Ingathering). Exod. 23.16, ' Y o u shall keep the feast of Ingathering at the going o u t (b'tse'th) of the year' (AT) means either 'at the end of the year' (RSV) or 'at the going f o r t h of the year'. Exod. 34.22 refers to 'the feast of ingathering at the end (t'quphath) of the year': t'quphah means t h e completion of a revolution or series (1 Sam. 1.20; Ps. 19.6; cf. J o b 1.5). 4 Tabernacles thus b o t h closes the year, a n d looks f o r w a r d to a renewal of earth a n d people t h a t will come with the 1

'The Pentateuch and the Triennial Lectionary Cycle', in F. F. Bruce (ed.) Promise and Fulfilment, Essays presented to S. H. Hooke (Edinburgh 1963). 2 The New Testament and the Jewish Lectionaries (London 1964). 1 'The Triennial Lectionary Cycle', JJS, xviii (1968), 41 ff. Heinemann is concerned with Mann's theory, but Mann is most effectively confuted by his own disciple, I. Sonne, who wrote up his material into the second volume (of three or four) between Mann's death in 1940 and his own in 1960: "The objections of Albeck and Lieberman are justified . . . (Mann's arguments) are not always convincing He left the realm of science' (II, xxiii f.). He refers to 'the Herculean labour of removing all the apparent considerable number of negative instances' (xxiii): he and Mann did not work simply, that is, from given lists of haphfardt—'our task was to ascertain from underlying data the original prophetic lections' (p. 13). This was done on principles of symmetry, avoidance of repetition, etc., and when the given haphfardt did not fit, they were put down as 'late' and 'removed'. The theory has been supported recently by J. Bowker, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature [TRL] (Cambridge 1969), pp. 72 ff. * H.-J. Kraus, Worship in Israel [WI] (1962, E.T. Oxford 1966), pp. 26 ff. R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel [.41] (2e„ E.T. London 1965), pp. 190 f., maintains that the year began with Tabernacles. It is true that tse'th can mean 'the going forth', e.g. of the sun, and that t'quphah is also ambiguous; but there is no ignoring of the order of the festivals in the biblical sources. De Vaux also gives a forced interpretation of t'shubhath hashshanah (2 Sam. 11.1 =1 Chron. 20.1, cf. 1 Kings 20.22, 26), the (re)turn of the year 'when the kings go forth to battle'. The year (re)turns at new year: equinoxes, as de Vaux tells us seven

following rains. It was a seven-day feast before the exile, and the new year will have begun on the first day, 15th, or the last day, 21st, or the day following, 22nd Ethanim. This was the name of the month in early times; but the Babylonian name, Tishri, was adopted after the exile. The Jews are conservative, and the cycle of readings from the Law (sidrdt) still begins today after the (now lengthened) feast of Tabernacles, on Simhath Torah, 23rd Tishri. The exile brought about a change in this pattern. The Babylonian new year was in the spring, not the autumn, and the main stream of the Israelite exiles adopted this usage: almost all the biblical dates are taken from a new year on 1st Nisan. According to 2 Kings 25.8 the Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in the fifth month, and this must have been in August/September because the wine, fruit and oil were already gathered (Jer. 40.10), and after the murder of Gedaliah two months later, were stored (Jer. 41.8). The tradition that the destruction of the Temple in August of A.D. 70 was at the same time of year as the destruction by Nabonidus 1 is correct, for a fast of the fifth month is observed in Zechariah (7.3 ff.; 8.19), and is still observed on 9th Ab, the fifth month from Nisan, to commemorate the fall of the city. Jer. 36.22 describes an event in 'the ninth month, and the king was sitting in the winter house, and there was a fire burning in the brazier before him'—clearly the ninth month Kislev (December), starting from Nisan. Jeremiah's oracles were edited after the exile, so there is no need to suppose 2 that the change to a spring calendar took place earlier, when Babylonian influence became strong towards 600 B.C. There is no question of the Nisan new year being accepted for a secular calendar, while retaining the traditional sacred calendar in the way that Jews (and Christians) do today. All the dated events in the Heilsgeschichte were reckoned from Nisan. Solomon's Temple was dedicated (1 Kings 8.2) 'at the feast in the month Ethanim, which is the seventh month' from Nisan; the Exodus was in the first month, Abib/Nisan; Sinai in the third month, and so on. This calendar was accepted by the fourth-century Redactors, and dominates the Bible. Its controversial tone is hinted by the defensive note of Exod. 12.2, 'This month (Nisan) shall be for you the lines above, enter Judaism later. No doubt Assyrian and Babylonian kings went out to battle in the spring; but then their new year was in the spring. In Israel the work of harvesting was done, and the army mobilized and consecrated at Tabernacles; ploughshares had but to be beaten into swords. Pss. 2, 46, 48, which are all probably Tabernacles psalms, picture invasions by enemy kings; cf. also the scene at the beginning of 1 Kings 22. 1 Josephus, B.J., vi, 269 f., m Taan. 4.6. 2 De Vaux, AI, p. 192.

beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year for you.' This state of affairs could never have obtained if the D-community had not taken the annual religious cycle to begin in the spring. Nor did the order of festivals in the old calendars contradict it: they gave the cycle of feasts as Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Tabernacles—new year on 1st Nisan would do very well. The spring calendar is not, however, the only one in post-exilic Israel. According to Exod. 40.1 (P) the Tabernacle was erected on the 1st day of the first month, and in .17 (P) this is specified as the 1st day of the first month of the second year. But which is the first month? Since the Dedication of the Temple was in Ethanim/Tishri, we should have expected the Dedication of the Tabernacle to be in Tishri likewise, for P is hardly drawing on genuine history, but is concerned here as elsewhere to justify current liturgy. This is confirmed in what follows. In Num. 1.1 (P) Moses is commanded to make the census on the 1st day of the second month of the second year; and in Num. 7.1-83 (P) the princes bring their offerings for twelve days. Even if the census took only a day, this would bring us to 13th Iyyar (the second month). But in Num. 9 (P) Israel keeps the Passover a year after the Exodus, and if the 'first month' of Exod. 40/Num. 1 were Nisan, this would mean backtracking. The events can be kept in order only if the 'first month' of Exod. 40/ Num. 1 is Tishri: there are then six months for the census, offerings, etc., till Passover the following Nisan. The Redactors have corrected most deviant dates in P, including putting Passover in the first month (Nisan) at Num. 9.1, but those in Exod. 40 and Num. 1 escaped their notice. So P retained the autumn new year: indeed, even without this evidence we should have to postulate a conservative community in exile which persevered in the old ways, for unless some influential group had retained the autumn new year, Ro'sh Hashshanah would have been on 1st Nisan. But, interestingly, it is not; nor is it on the old new year in mid-Tishri: it is on 1st Tishri, the date of the erection of the Tabernacle in P. We find already in Ezekiel (45.18) the cleansing of the sanctuary on 1st Tishri, and it may well be that preparations for Tabernacles began with the blowing of trumpets at the new moon (Ps. 81.3) earlier still, when all Israel had to make the pilgrimage to the central sanctuary.1 The H and P calendars in Lev. 23 and Num. 28-29 1

As 'all Israel' had to appear before the Lord at Tabernacles (and Unleavened Bread and Pentecost), and some Israelites lived a hundred miles from the central sanctuary, especially when the central sanctuary was at Dan or Jerusalem, the pilgrimage would take some ten days each way, and a hornblowing at 1st Tishri would seem an obvious desiderandum.

have 1st Tishri as a solemn day of rest marked with the blast of trumpets (Lev. 23.23; Num. 29.1): the day is not mentioned in the J, E and D calendars. Perhaps it is more the opening of the penitential pre-Tabernacles season than New Year still, but it is a day of joy in Neh. 8.9-12. By the time of the Mishnah, 1st Tishri is Ro'sh Hashshanah par excellence. There are three other subsidiary New Years: 1st Nisan ('for kings and feasts'), 1st Elul ('for Tithe of Cattle'), lst/15th Shebat ('for fruit-trees');1 but mid-Tishri is forgotten. We may reconstruct with some confidence the relationship between the different exiled communities and the three different calendars. The returning exiles at the end of the sixth century observed the Nisan calendar; and the Nisan calendar governs the dates through the Deuteronomic corpus. The four fasts of the fourth, fifth, seventh, and tenth months (Zech. 8.19; 7.2-5) all commemorate disasters associated with the fall of Jerusalem, and all follow the Nisan year. The fast of the fifth month is 9th Ab, as I have already commented. That in the seventh month is in memory of Gedaliah, murdered in the seventh month of 586 (2 Kings 25.25, Jer. 41.1 f.), Tishri, when the wheat, barley, oil, and honey were stored (Jer. 41.8). The fast of the tenth month recalls the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25.1) 'in the tenth month, on the tenth day of the month', Tebeth (January). The fast of the fourth month commemorates the cessation of the Burnt Offering in the Temple shortly before the fall of the city, on 17th Tammuz,2 the fourth month from Nisan. Haggai prophesied of the coming glory of the Temple 'in the seventh month, on the twenty-first day of the month' (Hag. 2.1)— the day on which Solomon completed the Dedication of the first Temple on the 21st Ethanim/Tishri (1 Kings 8.65 f.; cf. 8.2), the seventh month from Nisan. The editors of Zechariah's oracles have named the months in which his prophecies were dated, confirming the same Nisan calendar: 'the ninth month, which is Chislev' (December, 7.1), 'the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat' (February, 1.7). The returned exiles of the sixth century thus observe a Nisan calendar like the Deuteronomists, and they keep feasts and fasts marked in the D-corpus. Zechariah's thought and language 1 2

m R.H. 1.1. The fast of 17th Tammuz is also associated by Jewish tradition (m Taan. 4.6) with the breaking of the Tables of the Commandments, and with three events in A.D. 70. But the breaking of the Tables can only be placed on 17th Tammuz by forced mathematics. The receiving of the Law (Exod. 19—23) on 6th Sivan (Pentecost), plus forty days that Moses was on the mountain (Exod. 24.18), would yield 17th Tammuz if Sivan were 29 days. But the six preliminary days of Exod. 24.16 have to be subsumed into the forty.

are much influenced by the homiletic matter in Deuteronomy.1 It is easy to conclude that the D-traditions were dominant in late sixthcentury Jerusalem. The exiles who returned with Ezra about the year 400 brought with them the H or P tradition of a 1st Tishri new year.2 Ezra was a priest, and his coming is portrayed as with shock at the ignorance and slackness of the people in Jerusalem, which he counters by reading them the Law (Neh. 8). The people do not keep the laws because they do not know them: they are the priestly traditions from Babylonia, hitherto unknown in the West. This is made plain by the dating: 'And when the seventh month had come . . . And all the people gathered as one man into the square before the Water Gate; . . . Ezra the priest brought the law before the assembly, . . . on the first day of the seventh month' (Neh. 7.73—8.2). On the 1st Tishri: on the date when the 'P' year began. The substance of Ezra's teaching was P/H material: 'This day (1st Tishri) is holy to Yahweh your God; do not mourn or weep' (Neh. 8.9). 1st Tishri is holy in the H code at Lev. 23.23-25, and in the P code at Num. 29.1-6, but is unknown in the earlier calendars. And again: 'They found it written in the Law that Yahweh had commanded by Moses that the people of Israel should dwell in booths during the feast of the seventh month' (Neh. 8.14). And again: 'Go out to the hills and bring branches of olive, wild olive, myrtle, palm, and other leafy trees to make booths, as it is written' (.15). These instructions are not found in the J, E or D calendars: they come in the H calendar at Lev. 23.4042. Thus in the course of time Israel came to have a D-calendar beginning on 1st Nisan, with an anomalous H/P New Year 'in the seventh month, on the first day of the month' (Lev. 23.24). But there were other Jews who settled in Babylonia and did not go back to Palestine. They took with them into exile a New Year at the feast of Tabernacles, and they, the Babylonian Jews, have bequeathed to Israel the traditional cycle of readings beginning from Simhath Torah, the Rejoicing in the Law, at the end of the feast of Tabernacles. In a ghetto situation, they were the most conservative community of all, and in the course of time their annual cycle of readings from after Tabernacles became normative for Judaism as a whole, like most other Babylonian traditions. Without positing the 1

2

With Zech. 1.6 cf. Deut. 28.2,15; with 1.21 cf. Deut. 32.10; with 2.12 cf. Deut. 32.9; with 5.3 cf. Deut. 29.27; with 6.15 cf. Deut. 30.1 ff.; with 7.14 cf. Deut. 28.33; with 8.14 cf. Deut. 9.7 f„ 22. It is irrelevant to our purpose whether Ezra brought just P/H traditions with him, or, as is often thought, something close to our Pentateuch; e.g. G. Fohrer, Introduction to the Old Testament [IOT] (E.T., London 1968), p. 192.

survival of the old Tabernacles New Year in such a community, we should have no explanation for the traditional pattern of readings. We have thus a solution to the second of our problems. There were at the turn of the era, in Luke's century, two Jewish calendars in operation. The one valid in the West was the biblical calendar whose year began on 1st Nisan: 'This month (Nisan) shall be for you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year for you.' This is the calendar in use in the West in the following centuries. Judas Maccabaeus dedicated the new altar 'on the twentyfifth day of the ninth month, which is the month of Chislev'—the ninth month from Nisan (1 Macc. 4.52). Simon the high priest was murdered 'in the eleventh month, which is the month of Shebat'— the eleventh month from Nisan (1 Macc. 16.14). The same year was taken over into the Church. Tertullian can ask, 'Cur Pascha celebramus anno circulo primo mense?'1 There was a second calendar operative in the East, with a New Year on the old pre-exilic date at the end of Tabernacles. But for the main Jewish tradition based on Jerusalem, in the synagogues of the western Diaspora, and in the church of St Luke, any cycle of readings must have begun on 1st Nisan.

(ii) The Torah as an Annual Cycle of Recitals It is probable that the autumn festival was used even in pre-Israelite times for the recital of the community's sacred stories: such appears to have been the occasion for the recital of the Ba'lu myth at Ugarit.2 In early days in Israel the law was read at the autumn festival every seventh year: 'At the end of every seven years, at the set time of the year of release, at the feast of booths . . . you shall read this law before all Israel in their hearing' (Deut. 31.10 f.). Our first document that is part of the Tabernacles liturgy is Ps. 81, which implies both a recital of God's mighty deeds at the Exodus and a statement of his law. 'Blow the trumpet at the new moon, at the full moon, on our feast day' (.3) is not a clear text, but it is widely agreed that the hagh is Tabernacles. The psalm has a series of references to the Exodus narrative: God's going out against Egypt (.5), Israel's deliverance from bondage (.6f), the thunderstorm at Sinai (.7b), the testing at Meribah (.7c), the forbidding of idolatry (.8f), the people's disobedience (.llf). The psalm is thus well suited to be a 1 2

De Jej., 1.14; the same is implied by later Western fathers, Ambrose, Victorinus of Pettau and Zeno of Verona; cf. Dold, op. cit., pp. xcii ff. J. C. de Moor, The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Ba'lu (NeukirchenVluyn 1971), pp. 56 ff.

response to a recital of the Exodus-Desert traditions; and the references to God's statute and ordinance (.4), his decree (.5), and his admonishment to hear (.8) suggest a setting of law-reading likewise. Ps. 118 is another festival psalm (.27) in which the people's leader undertakes to 'recount the deeds of the Lord' (.17); and there are many other psalms which are thought, with less certainty, to have been part of the Tabernacles liturgy, and which make reference to meditating on God's deeds (e.g. 77.11 ff.), or which do so (e.g. 78, 80, 83; 95, 99, 103, 105, 106). Deut. 27 similarly echoes a regular pre-exilic recital in the cult, the setting of which at Shechem shows it to be in part ancient.1 The whole people is assembled, and blessed and cursed according to the twelvefold law proclaimed by the Levites and written on stones. So the law, and the mighty deeds of God leading up to the covenant, were never a matter of secret priestly lore: they were proclaimed in worship from the beginning. From the time of our earliest calendars, in Exod. 23 and 34, Tabernacles is not a septennial but an annual feast, and so are Unleavened Bread and Pentecost. Deut. 26 prescribes an annual harvest thanksgiving of the first fruits, whether at the spring (Lev. 23.10) or summer (Exod. 23.16), which includes a recital of the sacred history (Deut. 26.5-9). It is often thought that Josh. 24 and Neh. 9 reflect the pattern of an annual renewing of the covenant, including the recital of the Heilsgeschichte and the law.2 Joshua rehearses the sacred history from Abraham on (Josh. 24.2 ff.), and makes statutes and ordinances for the people (.25f.). A similar renewal takes place at the end of the feast of Tabernacles in Neh. 9, when Jeshua and Ezra have similarly rehearsed God's mighty deeds from Abraham to the Desert, with an appendix for more recent times. So it seems likely that the recitation of the national history and the covenant with Yahweh was in one way or another made in the context of the feasts, on an annual cycle.3 The fullest recital is likely to 1 2 3

Kraus, Wl, pp. 141 ff. M. Noth, Das System der Zwolf Stamme Israels (Stuttgart 1930), pp. 65 ff., Das Buch Josuas (2c., Tubingen 1953), pp. 135 ff. The pre-exilic recital of the sacred history at a national cultic centre at Tabernacles is controverted. G. von Rad's form of the theory, The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (E.T. Edinburgh 1966), pp. 1-78, in which the recital of the Sinai tradition at an autumn festival at Shechem is divorced from a recital of the Exodus-Entry traditions at Pentecost at Gilgal, is problematical; but the same general theory is held by A. Alt, 'Die Wallfahrt von Sichem nach Bethel', Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israels (Munich 1953) i, 84 ff.; H.-J. Kraus, Wl, pp. 134 ff.; S. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship (E.T. Oxford 1962). It is criticized, for example, by G. Fohrer, IOT, pp. 116 ff.: the assumptions of (1) a sacral tribal league, (2) a common central sanctuary, (3) a Covenant Festival, (4) a special type of cult

have been at the autumn festival. In time the spring festival included Passover as well as Unleavened Bread in the calendar (Deut. 16.1-8), and so came to carry associations with the Exodus and Entry. But whether the recital was made at one or two or all of the feasts, an annual cyclical basis seems inevitable. Just as the Exile brought a change of calendar, so did it bring a break-up of the old patterns of worship. Not only was it impossible for all Israel to gather at the central sanctuary at Jerusalem; it was impossible for all Israel to gather at the feasts anywhere. Further, it would have been impossible to prevent the exiled communities from disintegrating on the basis of thrice-yearly worship. So it is not surprising that we find an increased use of the new moons, and a religious use of the sabbaths. Thirteen of Ezekiel's prophecies are dated: 1 five of them in the first weeks of Nisan and Tishri, three more on new moons. The three Nisan prophecies are all oracles against Egypt, and draw on the Exodus type: of the two Tishri prophecies, one includes reference to Eden and the Cherubim in ch. 28, and the other is the Temple vision of 40—48. This is interesting because it shows the prophet as drawing inspiration from the sacred tradition in themes of the liturgical season: Nisan is the time of the smiting of Egypt, Solomon dedicated the old Temple in Ethanim/Tishri, God's mighty deeds recited at Tabernacles opened with Creation. The visions are thus seen as arising out of the context of corporate worship, rather than as sheerly individual experiences, and the dates are given because the liturgical season gave \ with recitals of law and history, (5) a relationship between the theophany of the Psalms and that of Sinai, are all said to be speculative—'In reality nothing is explained; the primary role is assigned to a completely speculative process.' Our difficulty, however, is that where evidence is limited speculation is unavoidable. Fohrer himself thinks that the motives and forces behind the growth of the Hexateuch were (1) 'a scholarly interest in the recording of past events', (2) the provision of 'catechisms . . . based on a corresponding system of domestic instruction', (3) 'the pronounced pleasure Orientals derive from telling and listening to stories' (p. 116), (4) 'the attempt to permeate the portrayal (of the past) with religious concepts and understand events theologically' (pp. 143 f.). It is a matter of which speculations give the most convincing overall picture. 1 Ezek. 29.17 ff. is dated on the first day of the first month of the twenty-seventh year (l.i.27); 30.20 ff. on 7.L11; 32.17 ff. on 15.L12*; 31 on l.iii.ll; 1—3.15 on 5.iv.5; 20 on lO.v.7; 8—11 on 5.vi.6; 26—28 on l.vii.ll*; 40—48 on 10.vii.25; 33.21 ff. on 5.X.12; 24 on lO.x.9; 29.1-16 on l.xii.10*; 32 on l.xii.12. * marks disagreements between texts on the dates. Note also the occurrence of three prophecies on the 5th day of even-numbered months; this may have been a holy day at the end of the fifth week of a two-month cycle. The same feature occurs in the Roman calendar, where Nones is on the 5th day of the evennumbered months.

point—otherwise surely they must have been forgotten. Thus opening vision by the river Chebar will have been at the same sort of riverside worship as is evidenced in Ps. 137.1 (and Acts 16.13); it seems to be an extension of the vision of Moses in Exod. 24, who saw the glory of God on a pavement of sapphire (cf. Ezek. 1.26). In chs. 8—11 Ezekiel sees the seventy elders worshipping idols, like Aaron and the people in Exod. 32, and the executioners slaying them from the four gates of the city (Ezek. 9; Exod. 32.25 ff.). Although new moon and sabbath first appear in the Bible as days of rest (2 Kings 4.23; Amos 8.5), they were already, before the exile, days of worship. They stand together with the festivals in Hos. 2.11 ff., as 'feast days of the Baals', and are hated and despised along with other occasions of worship in Isa. 1.13 f. But Ezekiel deepens their importance: 'Moreover I gave them my sabbaths, as a sign between me and them' (20.12)—the sabbath is now a symbol of the covenant. Special new regulations are laid down for the future both for sabbaths (46.1-5) and for new moons (46.6 ff.), with the prince presiding; and the abuse of the sabbath is a particular sin in 20.21, 22.26, 23.38. Nor is it Ezekiel only; Ill-Isaiah, deriving from another exilic tradition, can look forward to a day when 'From new moon to new moon, and from sabbath to sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me' (Isa. 66.23). It is to be noted that here no reference is made to the major festivals. The focus of worship is now new moon and sabbath, as was inevitable. By the time of P, and of the Chronicler, sabbath and new moon are firmly ensconced alongside the festivals as the main occasions of worship (Num. 28.9 f., 11 f.; 1 Chron. 23.31; 2 Chron. 2.4; Neh. 10.33). The Deuteronomistic community has no direct connection with Ezekiel, and was no doubt exiled to a different part of Babylonia. But here also the original function of the sabbath as a day of rest (Exod. 23.12) has been expanded with the command to observe and sanctify it, and it has been promoted into the Decalogue (Deut. 5.12-15). The same pressures to broaden the base of worship from the three festivals were on the D-community as on Ezekiel; and it is even clearer with the Deuteronomists than with him that the (now much amplified) sacred traditions were recited at such worship.1 The whole D-corpus was undertaken as a preaching exercise. Its aim was to edify the people: to insist that obedience to God's law was their duty, and that their fathers' failure to obey God's law had been their undoing. This emphasis runs from the opening paraenesis 1

cf. Kraus, Wl, p. 143, 'What is remarkable is the cultic actuality of the "today" that runs through the whole of Deuteronomy and shows the connection that the traditions have with worship.*

30

The Torah as an Annual Cycle of Readings

THE TORAH AND THE TWO CALENDARS EAST

WEST

Nisan

Gen. Gen. Gen. Gen.

Passover

1.1 In the Beginning 6.9 Noah 12.1 Go you 18.1 And God appeared

Gen. 23.1 The Life of Sarah Gen. 25.19 The Descendants Gen. 28.10 And he went forth

Iyyar

22nd Tishri

Cheshvan

Kislev Pentecost Sivan Exod. 1.1 The Names

Tebeth

Tammuz Shebat Exod. 27.20 You shall command Exod. 30.11 When you take Exod. 35.1 And he assembled

Ab

Adar

Lev. 1.1 And he called

Elul • 1st Tishri 10th 15th-22nd

Sheqalim"

New Year Atonement Tabernacles

Nisan Lev. 16 After the Death Lev. 18 Lev. 23 Feasts Lev. 26 Curses Num. 1.1 In the Wilderness

Passover

Iyyar

Cheshvan Sivan

Pentecost

Kislev Tammuz Tebeth

Deut. 1.1 The Words Ab

Shebat

Adar

Sabbath Zakor

Deut. 25.17-19 Zakor Deut. 28 Curses

Scale: 10 pp. of Biblia Hebraica—11 days.

Elul 1st Tishri 15th Tabernacles

in Deut. 1—4 to the funeral oration over the fall of Samaria in 2 Kings 17, and beyond; and it demands a preaching Sitz-im-Leben for the work. We have no prima facie evidence of the pattern of recitals in either Ezekiel's or the Deuteronomists' community; though I have some suggestions to make in ch. 4. No doubt at first the selection of a part of the tradition for a particular new moon or sabbath was on a tentative basis, whether it was ad hoc or serial. Sooner or later it was a serial selection, because that is what we find in operation in the Mishnah; and nothing forbids its having been serial from the start. But be that as it may, it is plain that the recurrence of the festivals in an annual cycle would ensure that the developing pattern had an annual structure; and this suggests the beginning of an answer to our third problem. The annual cycle is primary: the triennial cycle is a sophistication.

(iii) The Holiness Code and the Autumn Festival Readings For the first part of the Torah, the problem facing the fourth-century Redactors was mainly that of reconciliation: the outline of the story was fixed, and there was little freedom over the order. This situation obtained until the first sacrifice was offered in the Tabernacle in Lev. 9, with the exception of any variations in the order of the desert events of Exod. 15—18. After Lev. 9, however, in the legal sections, there is no demanding logical order, and the Redactors could suit other needs. There is, for example, a marked artificiality about the order in the middle of Leviticus. In Lev. 10 Nadab and Abihu are struck dead for offering unholy fire, and instruction is given to Aaron, and to their surviving brothers; in Lev. 11—15 the people are to be taught the laws of uncleanness, in food, for women, in leprosy, in sexual discharge; in Lev. 16, 'after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before the Lord and died', Aaron is taught, through Moses, the ritual for Atonement Day; then follows the H-code, with laws about sacrifices (17), forbidden marriages (18), sundry matters (19—20), the holiness of priests (21—22), the Calendar (23), etc. I wish to explain the postponement of ch. 16 from its natural context following ch. 10, and other matters, by a proportional argument, which I shall use a number of times. In Biblia Hebraica the Torah occupies 320 pages of text; the midpoint occurs, therefore, at p. 160. If, then, we take up the possibility which I suggested in the last section, and suppose for a moment that the Torah was recited sabbath by sabbath in sections round the

year from Nisan in lectio continua, then by the first sabbath in Tishri (half-way through the year) we should have reached about p. 161. There are 354 days in a normal Jewish year, fifty weeks and four days; so there would be either 50 or 51 sabbaths in a year, and each sabbath would require an average of just over six pages of text. Now Lev. 16, the law of the Day of Atonement, occurs on pp. 169-70, and is therefore sited exactly so as to be read on the proper day in the course of such a cycle of continuous readings: it would fall (by its place in Biblia Hebraica) to be read in the second

week of Tishri, and the date of the Day of Atonement is 10th Tishri. Lev. 16 is the reading for Atonement in the Mishnah and Talmud; and the Talmud adds an additional reading for the evening of Atonement, Lev. 18. This is a surprising choice, for Lev. 18 is a chapter about forbidden marriages, and has no clear connection with the theme of Atonement. However, Lev. 16—18 are combined into a single reading in the traditional sabbath series of sidrdt, and the lectionary hypothesis would offer a straightforward solution for the choice. The whole unit, the Law of Atonement and the Noachian Commandments (forbidding sacrifice to idols, the eating of blood, and consanguineous marriage)1 was the original fourth-century lection for the Day of Atonement. In this way, forgiveness for sins was provided, and the central sins were outlined (cf. Acts 15.20, 29). In time, the day of affliction on 10th Tishri (Lev. 23.26-32) was divided into a main service and an evening service, with Lev. 16 taking pride of place in the morning, and Lev. 18 being retained at 1

Lev. 16, the law for the rites of Atonement, leads on naturally to the laws for sacrifice to Yahweh only at the central sanctuary (Lev. 17.1-9) with the blood poured out on the ground (Lev. 17.10-16)—cf. 17.11, 'I have given (the blood) for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement, by reason of the life*. The table of sexual taboos follows in Lev. 18, with the general conclusion, 'Do not defile yourselves by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am casting out before you defiled themselves* (18.24-30). The nations committed idolatry and consumed blood as well as committing sexual perversions. The triple theme of sacrifice to Yahweh, the sanctity of the blood and the forbidding to uncover the nakedness of one's parent are found together in Gen. 8.20—9: 'the Lord smelled the pleasing odour' (Gen. 8.21; cf. Lev. 17.6), 'Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood' (Gen. 9.4; cf. Lev. 17.11), 'And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father' (Gen. 9.22; cf. Lev. 18.7). They recur in the apostolic decrees against pollutions of idols, blood and what is strangled, and unchastity, in Acts 15.20,29; 21.25; they were felt by the Jews to be the fundamental commandments incumbent on all mankind (G. F. Moore, Judaism, i, 274 f.). The alternative explanation offered by Rashi for Lev. 18 being read in the evening of Yom Kippur is: 'Apparently this section is chosen because the temptation to sexual offences is particularly strong' (M. Simon, Soncino ed. of b Meg., p. 188).

the end. The uncleanness laws of Lev. 11—15 were inserted so that Lev. 16 did not come too early. For the first day of Tabernacles the Mishnah prescribes Lev. 23,1 and the Talmud is understood as prescribing Lev. 22.26—23.44.2 Lev. 23, the H law of the Feasts, is in part a suitable reading, and comes on pp. 179-81 of Biblia Hebraica. There would thus be space for just one sabbath's reading between pp. 173 (end of Lev. 18) and 179, should there be a sabbath between Atonement on 10th and Tabernacles on 15th. These three initial correspondences between the positions of the traditional lessons in the Pentateuch and their positions in the hypothetical synagogue year seem to me quite striking. They are presented in diagram form on p. 30, the calendar from Nisan being marked down the left side of the page, and the Pentateuch being represented by a column in the middle of the page. No correspondence would be practicable between such a lectionary system and the other two feasts, Passover and Pentecost, since both these feasts would fall within the Genesis section; all we can say is that where the Redactors had freedom the correspondences are there. Just as the readings Lev. 16 and 18 for Atonement suggest that the original lection was Lev. 16—18, so the Mishnah and Talmud readings for the first day of Tabernacles suggest a fuller earlier lection. The only part of Lev. 23 which is truly appropriate for the occasion in any obvious sense is Lev. 23.33-end, the Tabernacles law. But the Mishnah provides (cf. n. 1) for the whole of the chapter to be read, i.e. the laws for sabbath, Passover, 'Omer, Pentecost, gleanings, 1st Tishri and Atonement as well; and to this the Talmud adds 22.26-33, certain rules for sacrifices. These have no clear connection with Tabernacles, and are at the end of a section on the subject, Lev. 22.17-30. Again, therefore, we seem to be faced with an abbreviation; perhaps the original lesson was the sidra, Lev. 21—24, the laws for the holiness of priests,3 of offerings, of the calendar, of oil and shewbread and, of God's name. 1

m Meg. 3.5, 'On the first Festival-day of the Feast (of Tabernacles) they read the section "The Set Feasts" in the Law of the Priests.' Danby interprets this as Lev. 23.1 ff.; Elbogen, JG, p. 165, as Lev. 23.33-end, the 'few verses referring to the particular feast'. Danby is surely right: the phrase 'The set feasts' occurs in Lev. 23.2,4, but not in 33. Elbogen's hypothesis is a part of his theory that the original lections were very short. 2 b Meg. 31a, 'On the first day of Tabernacles we read the section of the Festivals in Leviticus.' This might naturally be read to mean Lev. 23. However, the traditional reading for the day is Lev. 22.26—23.44, and Elbogen takes this to be the intention of the Talmud (p. 165): it would be hard to explain the traditional reading otherwise. 3 Fohrer, IOT, p. 140, comments, 'Since this is all part of priestly professional lore, its use in cultic recitation is quite out of the question.' But then its use in

The indication that this is so arises from the multiple links between the H-code and the autumn festival. One Canaanite name for the festival was hillulim, Thanksgiving: 'And (the Shechemites) went out into the field, and gathered the grapes from their vineyards and trod them, and held festival' (hillulim, Judg. 9.27). Lev. 19.23 ff. provides for the consecration of new fruit-trees for four years: 'and in the fourth year all their fruit shall be holy, an offering of praise (hillulim) to the Lord'. H.-J. Kraus comments, 'The rite laid down coincided, of course, with the festival of the autumn cult (sc. in Israel).' 1 Lev. 25.1-7 sets out the law of release for the land in the seventh year, and the year of release is said elsewhere to have been dated from the autumn festival: 'At the end of every seven years, at the set time of the year of release, at the feast of booths . . . ' (Deut. 31.10). Lev. 25.8 ff. provides for the jubilee, the similar release that is to take place in the fiftieth year. This also is dated from the autumn festival, and is prefaced by the blowing of trumpets at Atonement: 'Then you shall send abroad the loud trumpet on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the day of atonement you shall send abroad the trumpet . . . ' (.9). Lev. 26 is largely devoted to the curses that will fall on disobedient Israel, the effect of which will be that the land will automatically enjoy its sabbaths of release (.34 ff.). Lev. 27 is the law of vows; and vows in Jewish tradition are valid round the year until the service of Kol Nidrei at Atonement, when all unfulfilled vows are cancelled. The concentration of autumn festival lessons (Lev. 16; 18; 22.26— 23.44) and autumn festival laws (Lev. 19.23 ff.; 25; 26; 27) in the H-code cannot but make us suspect two things. First, the code was originally an autumn festival proclamation. Much of the material is in the form of apodeictic laws, which seem to require a setting of proclamation in a national festival. Some laws needed to be proclaimed at Tabernacles, others not; but the law-reading which has been inferred from Josh 24. and other texts a staking place at Tabernacles seems actually to be instantiated in the Holiness Code, which contains plentiful examples of both. It was Ezra's community's form of the covenant law, read by him in the seventh month before the Water Gate: 'And day by day, from the first day to the last day, cultic recitation/reading is an established fact in the traditional sidrdf, at what stage are we to suppose that the priests released their professional lore for public hearing, if not from the beginning? In many communities priestcraft was a secret in the ancient world, just as police practice is in many modern ones. But in Israel the priests were subject to divine law, just as the police are subject to parliamentary law in England, and then the laws are available for all to read or hear. 1 Wl, p. 136.

he read from the book of the law of God' (Neh. 8.18). For, as we have seen, the provisions mentioned for celebrating the festival in Neh. 8 agree only with those in the H-code calendar, Lev. 23. Second, it would seem that the Redactors of the Pentateuch have retained the H-code as the readings for the autumn festival, so siting it in the total Torah that each year it was reached at the appropriate date: Atonement Sabbath after Atonement Opening of Tabernacles End of Tabernacles

Lev. 16—18 Lev. 19—20 Lev. 21—24 Lev. 25—27

These units survive as sidrdt 29-33 in the traditional use; the last being split into two short units, Lev. 25—26.2 and 26.3-27, for reasons which I shall come to shortly.

(iv) The Sidrdt as the Work of the Redactors We need now to generalize the suggestion of the last section. If it is so that the Redactors arranged the Pentateuch not so much as a whole but rather as a series of public liturgical readings, with the H-code designed to coincide with Atonement-Tabernacles, then the traditional units, the sidrdt, will not be the work of later generations but of the Redactors themselves. That this is in fact the case may be seen from an examination of the divisions in the text.1 Ancient redactors were not equipped with the tools of modern criticism, and it was difficult for them to discern the proper, or best, divisions in an already fixed text; but if they were constructing the text for themselves out of various traditions, they would be at liberty to make their own divisions, which would therefore be logical ones. Now some parts of the Pentateuch came to the Redactors in already fixed blocks, which were left by them virtually untouched, notably the book of Deuteronomy; while other books required constant sewing together, like the book of Genesis. If the Redactors put the Pentateuch together as a series of readings, we should expect the divisions in Genesis to make sense, and those in Deuteronomy to make less sense; and that is exactly what we do find. The Deuteronomy sidrot are on the whole irrational. The actual structure of the book, as every theological student knows, is a collection of laws in chs. 12—26, prefaced by two paraenetic introductions, 1—4.40 and 5—11, and followed by further paraenetic material, 1

The traditional sidrdt (and haphfardt) are set out in Table I on pp. 67-9.

27—33, and Moses' death, 34. The sidrdt hardly correspond with this at all. The second sidra begins at 3.23, 'And I besought the Lord at that time', which is a minor break like that at 3.18, 'And I commanded you at that time'. The third begins at the equally minor break, 7.12. It would have been logical to make the divisions at the end of chapters 4 and 7. We cannot really criticize the breaks at 11.26 (a few verses before the laws begin), 16.18, and 21.10; but it seems curious to divide the text at the end of 25 instead of 26, and 29.10 is in the middle of a speech of Moses. Thus, when presented with a fixed block, those who made the sidrot were out of their depth in trying to find suitable divisions. With the divisions in Genesis, however, we have a very different picture. There are two opening sections, 'In the Beginning' and 'Noah'; three sections for Abraham: (a) the promises (12—17), (b) the conception, birth, and sacrifice of Isaac (18—22), (c) Abraham's old age (23—25.18); three sections for Jacob: (a) Jacob and Esau (25.19—28.9), (b) Jacob and Laban (28.10—32.2), (c) Jacob's return (32.3—36); three sections for Joseph: (a) Joseph's sale into Egypt and imprisonment (37—40), (b) Joseph in power (41—44.17), (c) Joseph's discovery to his brothers and bringing of his family to Egypt (44.18^47.27); and finally, Jacob's death (47.28—50). Each section has its own theme, and sections (1), (2), (5), and (8) are rounded off with a genealogy, which acts as a punctuation mark. If the dividing had been of an already existing text, it would have been highly skilful, and in strong contrast to the dividing of Deuteronomy; but in fact the divisions are so natural that they seem to have been written in the Redactors' own text. The only point on which a modern scholar would take issue with the sidrdt is that the second section begins at 6.9 and not at 6.1, as we should expect. But the provision of an introduction to next week's sidra is a regular and natural feature: Gen. 11.26-32 introduces Abram; 17.15-21 is an initial promise of the conception of Isaac; 28.1-9 sends Jacob on his way. Furthermore the opening formula of sidra (2), 'These are the generations of Noah', introducing the story, is exactly paralleled by the opening formula of (6), 'These are the descendants of Isaac' (25.19), and of (9), 'This is the history of the family of Jacob' (37.2)—the Hebrew is the same in all three cases.1 1

The distinction between the Genesis and Deuteronomy divisions is paralleled in the other three books. The first half of Exodus is the Redactors' own compilation, and its divisions are logical: (13) 1—6.1, The Oppression, (14) 6.2—9, The First Seven Plagues, (15) 10—13.16, The Last Three Plagues and the Exodus, (16) 13.17—17, Through the Desert, (17) 18—20 Sinai, (18) 21—24, The Ordinances and Moses' second ascent. In the second half, the break between (21) and (22) coincides with that between J and P material, but elsewhere,

It begins to look possible, therefore, that the Redactors rewrote the Pentateuch in divisions for reading in an annual cycle. But would such a cycle of sidrdt correspond with the liturgical year of feasts in the same way that they fitted the proportions of Biblia Hebraical The outline can be seen in the left-hand half of Table II. The Jewish year is based on the unit of a moon, which is close to 29£ days in length, so that the six months from 1st Nisan to 29th/30th Elul (approximately our September) normally consist of 177 days. A month may not be less than 29 nor more than 30 days, so for our purposes the norm suffices; in practice the length of a month depended on the sighting of the new moon. 177 days comprise twentyfive weeks and two days, including 25 or 26 sabbaths. The first 26 sidrdt would then be readings for these sabbaths: (26) describes the opening of sacrificial worship (Lev. 9—11), and would fall about New Year. When there were 25 sabbaths (as there usually were), we should have to assume the modern practice of combining the last two readings in a book, either Genesis or Exodus, as has been done for at least a millennium.1 No lectionary can work without such a minimum of elasticity. Passover would fall after the second, Pentecost about the tenth sidra. There might be either one or (rarely) two sabbaths between New Year on 1st Tishri and Atonement on 10th; and whereas hitherto the average length of a reading has been four chapters, we now find two sidrdt of only two chapters, (27) Lev. 12—13, and (28) Lev. 14—15. Lev. 13 and 14 are on the same subject, leprosy. These could be combined or split as occasion required, leaving (29) Lev. 16—18 for Atonement. The brief (30) Lev. 19—20 could also be used on its own in years when there was a sabbath between Atonement on 10th and Tabernacles on 15th. When there was not, it could be combined with (31) Lev. 21—24 on the sabbath in the festal week. There are now twenty-three sidrdt remaining for 155 days, twenty-two weeks and a day, with either 22 or 23 sabbaths. There are two short ones when P matter is being subdivided, the Redactors are plainly at a loss. The same is true through most of Leviticus, a book of pre-formed P and H blocks, and through the beginning and end of Numbers, which is largely P material. Some of the sidrdt in the middle of Numbers display a rough unity of theme, e.g. (37) 13—15, the refusal to enter the Land, and (38) 16—18, The Primacy of the Aaronic priesthood; precisely where the Redactors have had to do most editing. 1 Rules governing the combination of sidrdt so that the whole Pentateuch may be read in the year, and different points reached before each feast, are first found in the Gaonite Jehudai, about 750, but may be inferred to have been in operation in the second century A.D. (see below, pp. 45-7): cf. Elbogen, JG, p. 163.

at the end of Leviticus, (32) Lev. 25—26.2, and (33) Lev. 26.3—27: this cannot be accidental, and probably the rule was to finish Leviticus by the end of Tishri—the remaining sidrot would then fit exactly. There are four short readings at the end of Deuteronomy: (51) Deut. 29.10—30, (52) Deut. 31, (53) Deut. 32, and (54) Deut. 33—34. These were probably also originally for convenience of combination at the end of the year, but they have been retained for the sake of the balance of the Histories readings, as I shall explain later. One year in three, roughly (more exactly seven years in nineteen), an extra month was required to cover the shortfall between the lunar year of 354 days and the solar year of 365£ days. This month was called Second Adar, Adar being the twelfth month, and was inserted on an ad hoc basis in our period.1 Readings would be supplied for the thirteenth month by repetition, in the same way that the Book of Common Prayer divides the Psalter for a thirty-day month, and the psalms for the thirtieth day are repeated when the month has thirtyone days.

(v) The Chronicler s Work as an Annual Reading Cycle In the generation following the redaction of the Torah, the histories were rewritten by the Chronicler, and here we have a tentative confirmation of the lectionary hypothesis. In my earlier book I argued that the work of the Chronicler was undertaken for a liturgical, lectionary purpose;2 the whole corpus is constructed in such a way as to provide a series of second lessons to fit the theme of the Torah readings. The Hebrew order begins with the book of Ezra, in which Jeshua and Ezra complete what Joshua began, the fulfilment of the promises to Abraham that he would inherit the land. Then the tribal Genealogies in 1 Chron. complete the families of the patriarchs in Genesis. The story moves on at once to David, who is set out as a second Moses, and the construction of the Temple is told as a duplicate to the construction of the Tabernacle in Exodus. Solomon's prayer and sacrifice take up the opening passages of Leviticus, and there are strong Levitical echoes in the stories of his reign, and those of Rehoboam, Abijah, and Asa. The national apostasy of Numbers is re-enacted in the disobedience of the following kings, with special emphasis on Zechariah, who is stoned, as Moses' spies almost were, with Moses' words on his lips; on Uzziah, whose smiting takes up the stories of Miriam's leprosy and Korah's 1 2

1 Sanh. 2.6. MLM, ch. 10.

incense. Manasseh breaks the Deuteronomic laws, and Josiah enforces them; and to close the tale, the threat of exile in Deut. 28, and the promise of Return in Deut. 30, are fulfilled in the disaster of 586 and the edict of Cyrus. The parallels (which are reproduced in Table II, pp. 70-2) are not general only, but in many cases detailed; all but three of the fifty Chronicles sections marked had correspondences with the Pentateuch, and they fall in parallel series. For a fuller exposition I must refer the reader to ch. 10 of my Midrash and Lection

in

Matthew.

Now, the only satisfactory conclusion to this analysis is that the Chronicler was used to a sidra-haphfarah system, under which the second lesson (haphfarah) was related to the theme of the first (sidra).1 The Chronicler's purpose is transparently edificatory: he uses history as a means of teaching the people. To this end he takes the natural parallel of the Torah-saga with Israel's later history, and elaborates the points as they come. I hope to show in ch. 4 that the Deuteronomic Histories also bore this relation to the Torah as it was before the inclusion of the P-material, and the redaction. Now that there was a new R (Redacted) form of the Pentateuch, our Pentateuch, a new edition of the histories was required, and this the Chronicler has provided. Such an understanding of the rationale of the Chronicler's writing is doubly important for our thesis. For not only does it suggest that the Pentateuch was already being read cyclically. It confirms that the cycle was an annual one, because the correspondences only work for an annual cycle.2 The divisions I have marked break in most cases at the obvious points, being about two chapters each, fifty in all. This would be just about the number required for a 50-sabbath year; and the Passover of the Return (Ezra 6.19 ff.) would fall at Passovertide. The correspondences would fall in nicely round the 1

m Meg. 4.2, having set out the rules for the reading of the Torah, says: 'and they close with a reading from the prophets'. The prophetic reading was therefore called the 'closer', haphfardh, and it continued the theme of the sidra, often in the same words; cf. b Meg. 29b, 'Now according to the one who says that "When you take" (Exod. 30.11-16) should be said (on sabbath Sheqalim), there is good reason for reading Jehoiada the Priest (2 Kings 12) as haphfarah, because it is similar in subject, as it is written, "The money of the persons for whom each man is rated".' 2 This becomes obvious when the table is examined in detail. For one thing, although the normal subdivisions of Chronicles are of an even length, the portions opposite to the end of Numbers and the beginning of Deuteronomy are markedly shorter, and simply could not be divided into three to fit a triennial cycle. For another, the parallels which are so striking, for example, between the construction of the Tabernacle and the Temple on a 50-unit basis, would often fall one or two units out on a ISO-unit basis.

year with the 54 sidrdt; assuming that the latter were still in a semiformed state with the four short Deuteronomy readings at the end of the year being taken together, except in leap years. If Chronicles were divided into 154/165 units as the Torah is for a triennial cycle, most of the correspondences would not coincide.

(vi) The Samaritan Annual Cycle A further indication of the originality of the annual cycle may be seen from the practice of the Samaritans. Until at least the fourth century B.C. the Samaritans were more a party within Judaism than a sect without; and during the fourth century the Samaritans took over the Torah, substantially our Torah. Whether the break with Judaism occurred with the building of the Samaritan Temple in the 320s, as Josephus says,1 or earlier, or later,2 it was certainly possible for a considerable traffic in religious ideas and practice to take place at this period. The Samaritans developed an oral law,3 a hilluk, like, but independent of, the Judaean halakhah\ they adopted the practice of sabbath worship; they used the methods of midrashic exegesis and gematria to interpret the Law; and they made an Aramaic Targum that the people might understand it. In all these matters Judaeans and Samaritans share a common heritage. This is visible in the often remarked common ground between Samaritans and Sadducees against Pharisees. Samaritan religion was oriented towards the priesthood, as Judaism was until the rise of Pharisaism. The Samaritans denied the resurrection of the dead, as the Sadducees did, and followed Sadducaic calendrical practice in counting the fifty days to Pentecost from a Sunday, and in other details of h°lakhah. However, from the Hasmonean period, if not earlier, this traffic largely ceased. The hostility towards Jewry hardened to such a degree that religious and cultural exchange was reduced to a trickle. M. Gaster wrote, 'The slightest leaning towards the practices of the 1 Antiquities xi, 302-47. ? Josephus relates the building of the Samaritan temple to the work of a certain Sanballat. The coincidence with the name of the Samaritan governor of Nehemiah's time led Wellhausen and others to identify the two, and date the event a century earlier: cf. H. H. Rowley, 'Sanballat and the Samaritan Temple', BJRL 38 (1955), 183 f. J. D. Purvis, The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Origin of the Samaritan Sect (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), argues from the palaeography, vocalization and text of the Samaritan Torah to a second-century B.C. date for the final cleft with Judaism. The first two arguments are approved by B. J. Roberts in JTS 20.2 (1969), 569 ff. Similar conclusions of a gradual cleft over the last centuries B.C. are drawn by H. G. Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge (Berlin 1971), and R. J. Coggins, Samaritans and Jews (Oxford 1975). 3 M. Gaster, The Samaritans (London 1925), pp. 44-76.

hated Jews and the rival priesthood would have been fatal to (the Samaritan priests') position',1 and Prof. J. Macdonald says that he cannot detect in all his reading one definite example of Samaritans borrowing directly from Jews.2 The Samaritans from at least the time of Baba Rabba in the fourth century A.D. read the Torah in an annual cycle.3 The cycle began after Tabernacles, on the last sabbath in Tishri. Genesis was read for 13/14 sabbaths, ending with the last sabbath in Tebeth; or in intercalated years, for 18 sabbaths, till the end of Shebat. Exodus was read for eight sabbaths or nine, till the end of Adar; Leviticus in Nisan-Iyyar; Numbers in Sivan and Tammuz and the first week in Ab; and Deuteronomy through till the end of the year. To mark the readings by months is a simple precaution against getting out of step, and the only considerable inconvenience in the Samaritan system is that the Exodus readings are too long, with eight divisions against eleven in the traditional Jewish pattern. At all events the number of readings in total and per book is different in every case from the traditional Jewish scheme, and requires explanation. The facts would suggest that the Samaritan annual cycle was set up with the taking over of the Torah in the late Persian period. What did they want the Torah for, if the people were not to keep it? And how could they keep it, if they did not know it, and how could they know it without a reader? In what did sabbath worship consist if not in prayers, reading, and exposition? Why should anyone have gone to the length of translating the Law into Aramaic if the Targum were not required in the service? At every step a simple continuous reading cycle from the beginning is the easiest solution. If it is objected, 'But readings and Targum and a cycle, or any of them, could have been developed in the Samaritan renaissance period in the fourth century A.D.', there is the difficulty that few practices or doctrines can be pointed to with confidence as early A.D. borrowings from the Jews. Besides, had the borrowing taken place under Baba Rabba, we should have expected the Samaritans to borrow from the Jews of the West, by whom they were surrounded, and so to have borrowed the triennial cycle, which was dominant by then. Or 1 2

5

ibid., p. 47; cf. p. 63. The Theology of the Samaritans (London 1964), p. 53; cf. p. 29, 'Any claim for Samaritan borrowing from Judaism is nonsense, as anyone who has read all the available literature must judge.' Macdonald overstates the case, at least for the later period. The Samaritans borrowed Sa'adia's Arabic version of the Pentateuch, and the Jewish Palestinian vocalization system, about the twelfth century: cf. P. E. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza (2e., Oxford 1959), pp. 54, 66. A. Cowley, 'The Samaritan Liturgy and Reading of the Law', JQR vii (1894-5), 121-40.

alternatively, if it should so happen that they borrowed from Babylon, they would be taking over a Babylonian annual cycle starting in Tishri; and how, then, is it that they did not take over the Babylonian divisions, the sidrdt? The solution offered by the B.C. date escapes all these difficulties. The Samaritans had some preexilic roots: not many, but enough to know that ancient worship had been celebrated at Shechem, and that the year had begun after Tabernacles. They took over from Jerusalem the completed Torah and the habit of reading it in an annual cycle, but they kept their old New Year, and formed a regular independent cycle of their own. The tides of history marooned them, but the fundamental pattern of continuous annual reading still testifies today to a religious culture they shared with Judaism in the days of the last Persian kings.

(vii) The Special Sabbaths Between the final canonization of the Torah in Jerusalem and the fixing of the Mishnah more than half a millennium later, four special sabbaths were instituted in the last five weeks of the year, roughly in Adar (March); and of these, three testify to the existence of an annual cycle in the B.C. period. The earliest is probably the sabbath Zakor, the second sabbath in Adar, for which was appointed the special lection, Deut. 25.17-19, 'Remember (zakdr) what Amalek did . . . ' It is very likely, as G. F. Moore says,1 that there is a connection between this lection and the feast of Purim, for Purim was celebrated between 11th and 15th Adar, 2 and its special reading is the book of Esther and her battle of wits against Haman the Agagite: for Agag, in 1 Sam. 15, was an Amalekite; and Amalek's attack upon Israel, remembered in Deut. 25, is re-enacted in Haman's attack upon Israel in Esther. The dates of 13th-15th Adar are written into Esther, and it is likely that they are in some way associated with the Adar full moon. 3 The curious feature of the whole institution is that there should be a text of this nature in Deut. 25. Deut. 12—26 is a collection of laws and precepts, whether anachronisms or for everyday living; the vindictive little zakdr paragraph is of quite a different type, and lacks any credible Sitz-im-Leben * Furthermore, if one 1

Judaism, i, 298. The Tosefta, Meg. 4.2, fixes Zakor as the sabbath next before Purim. m Meg. 1.1. 3 cf. de Vaux, AI, pp. 514-17, bibliography p. 552. 4 G. von Rad, Deuteronomy (1964, E.T. London 1966), p. 155, asks appositely, 'What could be the contemporary significance of demanding this duty at a time when this notorious Bedouin tribe was hardly likely to be any longer in existence?' 1

wished to choose from the Torah a text on the viciousness of Amalek, Exod. 17.8-16 is fuller, and just as vindictive.1 A solution of these problems is plain when the position of Deut. 25.17 ff. is noted in the proposed lectionary system. Proportionally, the paragraph falls on p. 301 of Biblia Hebraica, and would thus be on the margin of the third and fourth sections from the end of the year (see the diagram on p. 30). By the sidrdt, it is the last three verses of sidra 49, and would thus be the closing piece of the Law reading for the third sabbath from the end of the year, or thereabouts (see Table II).2 What could be more suggestive? The unofficial celebration of Purim had begun before the close of the redaction of the Pentateuch, brought to the West by returning exiles who had lived in fear of pogroms;3 the persecutors had been aligned with Israel's implacable enemy, Amalek; the celebration called for a justifying text in the Torah reading for the week; the sabbath concerned would be the second in Adar, if it was to precede Purim, and would thus be usually the third from the end of the year; so a direction calling for the obliteration of Amalek was inserted at the end of sidra 49, Deut. 21.10—25.19, 'When you go forth (to war)'. The position of the sidra in the series could not be more exact, nor the position of the paragraph in the sidra more suspicious: it comprised the last verses of the section for the sabbath before the festival, on the basis of an annual cycle beginning in Nisan. So Purim as a semiofficial feast, and the zakdr reading that went with it, will have been established before the close of the Pentateuchal canon, i.e. by the first half of the fourth century. A second special reading whose institution is illuminated by the lectionary hypothesis is that on the last sabbath in Adar, Hahodesh: the reading is Exod. 12.1 ff, 'This month shall be for you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year for you' (m Meg. 3.4, b Meg. 30a). The tone is somewhat aggressive, and the point of when the calendar is to begin is irrelevant to the main theme of Exod. 12, the instructions for celebrating the Passover. Why has the Jewish tradition made a special point of having the passage read on the last sabbath in Adar? If it were so that the people might prepare for Passover,4 it should rather be read on the first or second sabbath in Nisan, so that the lambs could be taken on the tenth day 1 2 3 4

This passage was the lesson for Purim in b Meg. 31a. On the assumption of a 51 -sabbath/51 -sidrdt year, as argued above, pp. 39-40. cf. b Meg. 7a, 'At first they decreed the observance of Purim only in Susa, but afterwards throughout the world.' The point of the passage is often explained so, e.g. by Moore, Judaism, i, 298. Biichler, JQR,v, 427, suggests an origin in a dispute of Pharisees and Sadducees, but offers neither detail nor evidence.

of the month (12.3). It looks more likely that the section was read on the last sabbath in the old year so that the new liturgical year really did begin in Nisan: that it marks the triumph of the Dtradition with its Nisan cycle over the P Tishri cycle. A clash of the two traditions was inevitable, and the dogmatic way in which the redactors open the passage looks like the assertion of orthodoxy. If so, then it would ensure the eclipse of Ezra's Tishri cycle if the primacy of Nisan were celebrated annually before Nisan began; and this in turn would only be important if synagogue liturgical practice hung on it, i.e. if a Nisan cycle of readings and not a Tishri cycle of readings were to be followed. So far as the Scriptures were concerned, the Redactors had done their best to assimilate all the dates to a Nisan first month; if their victory required liturgical proclamation, it would be for a liturgical reason. As later with the Birkath-ha-Minim, nonconformity could best be brought into line by an addition to the liturgy. So both Zakor and Hahodesh were insertions made into the text of the Pentateuch by the Redactors for contemporary liturgical reasons. The principal nonconformists were not in Palestine but in Babylon, where, as we have seen, the original liturgical new year at the end of Tabernacles was still in use, and flourishing. The Babylonian Jews accepted the redacted Pentateuch with joy, and simply used the sidrdt beginning from their own new year; if they had not done so, we should lack any explanation for the origin of the modern synagogue practice, which follows the same pattern against both the biblically laid down New Years, the D/R 1st Nisan year (Exod. 12.1), and the P/H 1st Tishri year (Lev. 23.24); and which also goes against the 'landfalls' of Lev. 16, 18 and 23 with Atonement and Tabernacles. They were also pleased to adopt the practice of reading the zakor paragraph on the second sabbath in Adar to justify Purim, though this now meant reading the verses as a special supplement to the sidra, as it does today.1 They also had no objection to reading Hahodesh a fortnight later, as it could easily be interpreted as a reminder to be ready for Passover. The adoption of the reading cycle on a base at the end of Tabernacles in Babylonia soon set in motion a reverse process, with a 1

The four special sabbath readings are often interpreted, e.g. by Elbogen, JG, p. 153 f., as being originally the sole readings for these sabbaths. The Mishnah is ambiguous, but must in fact mean them to be supplementary readings, see below, pp. 61 f. The discussion in the Gemara (b Meg. 29b), and the traditional use, confirm this. The Tosefta (4.1-4) merely repeats statements in Mishnah and Talmud, and does nothing to confirm Elbogen's theory that the two reading cycles, annual and triennial, developed from such small units as these.

further special sabbath, Sheqalim, which fitted the Babylonian cycle and meant a supplementary reading in the West. Sabbath Sheqalim fell on the 1st Adar or the six days preceding at the end of Shebat:1 that is, normally there was an intermission of one sabbath between it and the other three special sabbaths. The Amoraim disputed which was the proper lesson between Exod. 30.11-16 and Num. 28.1-15, which was defended by Rab against the Babylonian Samuel.2 In the Exodus lesson, which triumphed, Moses ordains a contribution of a half-shekel per adult male for the Temple treasury, and the significance of the reading was that in the intertestamental period the levy came to be made annually, the money being delivered from all over the world to Jerusalem by Passover.3 In the Western cycle which I have been describing, the lection for 24th Shebat—1st Adar would be that for the fifth sabbath from the end of the year, and would fall in Deuteronomy; but in the Babylonian cycle these dates would be between 120 and 127 days after Simhath Torah (23rd Tishri), and the sabbath would be the eighteenth or nineteenth in the series, and the sidra from the middle of Exodus.4 That Exod. 30.11-16 actually did fall to be read on or about sabbath Sheqalim is evidenced by disputes in the Babylonian Talmud as to what should be done when the Sheqalim paragraph, qua special supplementary reading, coincides with sidra 20, Exod. 27.20—30.10 (from which it is a direct continuation), or sidra 21, Exod. 30.11—34.35 (in which case it would be read twice).5 Now, we know that the second Temple was begun by means of gifts sent from the East,6 and it was maintained by sh'qalim sent from East and West in the early A.D. period;7 it is hardly believable that it was not the same in the hard times between. The annual reading of the shekels paragraph in the course of a Babylonian cycle some seven weeks before Passover could well suggest to Babylonian Jews the desirability of taking up a collection each year at that time, and the sending of the money to Jerusalem 1

m Meg. 3.4. b Meg. 29b. 3 H. L. Strack & P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum neuett Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch [S-B] (Munich 1926) i, 760 ff. 4 R. Jehudai's rules (see above, p. 37, n. 1) require the 25th sidra to be reached before Passover, which is at most twenty-four weeks from 23rd Tishri: the last two sidrdt in a book were often telescoped, so sidra 20 would be reached on the nineteenth sabbath if the last two sections in Genesis were combined. 5 The passage is cited below, p. 64. ® Ezra 1.6, 'all who were about them aided them with vessels of silver, with gold . . . besides all that was freely offered'—the verb hithnaddebh recalls the free offering for the first Temple in 1 Chron. 29, and the free-will offering (n'dhabhah) for the Tabernacle in Exod. 35, taken up in response to Exod. 30.11 ff. 7 References in S-B, i, 763. 2

in time for the Feast. The habit would be received with enthusiasm in the West no doubt, and instilled in Palestinian Jews also as a duty, by the expedient of introducing the paragraph from the Babylonian lesson as an additional reading. In this way we should have an explanation for the institution of sabbath Sheqalim.1 The fixing of the date for 1st Adar or the days preceding would be for the convenience of the West, for whom the moving date on the Babylonian calendar would be irrelevant.2 The Babylonian cycle explains a further ancient tradition from the Talmud: 'We have learned in a Baraita: R. Simeon b. Eleazar said, Ezra ordained that Israel should read the curses in Leviticus before Pentecost, and those in Deuteronomy before New Year.' 3 R. Simeon was a fifth-generation Tannaite, a contemporary of Rabbi Judah; but the ascription to Ezra is almost certainly an indication of B.C. practice. If R. Simeon thought before A.D. 2 0 0 that Ezra had ordained it, it was not an innovation from Jamnia—rather it may be an indication of ancient practice in Babylonia, from where Ezra had come. In fact the two cursing chapters regularly fall before the respective feasts in the modern reading cycle from 23rd Tishri. We have no better guide to ancient practice in such details than the traditional use, and this involves special lessons not in the cycle for the sabbaths in the weeks of Tabernacles and Passover; hence there are 48 or 49 sabbaths for the lectio continua in a normal 50- or 51-sabbath year, and some 'squeezing' is necessary, usually by the combination of the two last readings at the end of a book, if all 54 sidrdt are to be read. Pentecost is in the 32nd week after Simhath Torah, and the curses in Lev.(26) are in the 33rd sidra. New Year (1st Tishri) is in the 48th week after Simhath Torah, and the curses in Deut.(28) are in the 50th sidra. The required squeezing always ensures that the cursing chapters are read before the feasts.4 Reference to the diagram on p. 30 will show that on the proportional basis the same is true. The traditional Jewish cycle from Simhath Torah forces its ancient character as a B.C. use upon every learned worshipper by the constant recurrence of the sh'qalim paragraph and the two cursing 1

2 s 4

Biichler, JQR v, 426, explains the origin of the sabbath by a controversy between Sadducees and Pharisees on free-will sacrifices settled in lst-8th Nisan, 79 B.C. The controversy is associated with the collection of sh'qalim in the first-century Megillath Ta'anith. But the connection of the collection with the controversy is remote, and the motive for perpetuating its memory obscure. With intercalation involving a Second Adar roughly one year in three, a fixed distance of seven sabbaths before Passover would be an advantage. b Meg. 31b. In 1970, for example, Lev. 26 was read eleven days before Pentecost, and Deut. 28 twelve days before New Year.

chapters at the times specified in the old traditions. The chapters for Atonement and the first day of Tabernacles, and the paragraphs for sabbaths Zakor and Hahodesh do not fit this lectionary pattern; but they do fit an identical cycle starting from the D/R New Year, 1st Nisan. It is these units which fit with the already fixed liturgical occasions—Atonement, Tabernacles, Purim, New Year—and this shows that the lectionary cycle is an integral part of the redaction done in Jerusalem to fit a Western (D/R) calendar. The annual collection in Shebat, and the recitation of curses before Pentecost and New Year are not pre-biblical institutions: they grew out of the Eastern reading cycle.1 (viii) Philo But it is not the fourth century B.C. which is our concern, but the first century A.D.: what we need to know is, Was the same annual cycle beginning in Nisan operative four centuries after the developments I have been describing? We are lucky enough to have the answer to this question from Philo.2 Philo wrote many works of commentary on Scripture, mainly on the books of Genesis and Exodus; and at the end of his life he wrote two semi-continuous commentaries, Questions on Genesis and Questions on Exodus. Neither covers the whole biblical work, and both have omissions which correspond fairly closely to material on which Philo had already commented—Gen. 1—2.3, for example, which he had covered in De Opificio Mundi, Gen. 11—15.6, which are the subject of De Confusione Linguarum, De Migratione Abrahami, etc. There were six books of the Questions on Genesis, which survive in an Armenian translation. Now, the interesting thing about the divisions into six books is that they correspond almost exactly with the six opening sidrdt of the traditional cycle. The first book omits Gen. 1—2.3, but continues to 6.13: the first sidra, 'In the Beginning', runs from 1.1 to 6.8. The second book continues from Gen. 6.14 to 10.9, omitting the Genealogies and the Babel story for the reason I have suggested, but otherwise coinciding with sidra (2), 'Noah', which 1

There is a fourth special sabbath, Parah (the red heifer), which falls between Zakor and Hahodesh. It is by no means impossible that this also has liturgical roots, as symbolizing the break for proselytes with heathendom as with the grave. The proselyte was cleansed, in part by a baptism, before joining Israel in his reception before Passover. 2 I have drawn the argument that follows from the introduction to R. Marcus's edition of Quaestiones in Genesim/Exodum, Loeb edn., XI (Cambridge, Mass. 1953), viii ff., to which the reader is referred. The divisions between the books are not all testified in the MSS, and are in part Marcus's reconstruction.

ends with Gen. 11. The third sidra, 'Go you', runs from Gen. 12 to 17, and Philo closes Book III at the end of 17, omitting the earlier part, Abraham's Migration and Melchizedek. The fourth sidra, 'And he appeared', comprises Gen. 18—22, and Philo's Book IV is Gen. 18—20; he does not comment on Gen. 21—22. There is no omission in the remaining two books, and they correspond with the sidrot exactly. 'The Life of Sarah', Gen. 23—25.18, corresponds to Book V, in which there are comments from 23.1 to 25.8. 'The Descendants', the sixth sidra, Gen. 25.19—28.9, corresponds to Book VI, in which there are comments from 25.20 to 28.9. We could not account for Philo's division into books on the grounds of equalizing length, for the first three books are 100, 82 and 62 questions in length respectively, and the number of pages of text is also unbalanced. Nor could we say that he had made the divisions in the obvious places, on the ground that the Redactors divided Genesis logically, as I have suggested. For one thing, his first division is in the middle of God's speech to Noah at Gen. 6.14, having overrun 6.8 by accident; for another, even when the breaks are logical they are not always obvious. The end of 17 is not an obvious break, for 17.15 ff. and 18 both tell of the promise of Isaac's birth, and might easily be taken as belonging together; but both Philo and the sidrdt put the division between them. Jacob's leaving home in 28.1-9 might as easily go with his coming to Beersheba in 28.10 ff.; but Philo and the sidrdt both close the sixth unit at 28.9. This means that Philo must have been following the sidra divisions of his day for Genesis; and R. Marcus's conclusion, on somewhat slenderer grounds, is the same for Exodus. Few results could be more helpful to us. Here is a writer in Luke's century; in Egypt, a part of the Western Diaspora such as Luke lived in; and it appears that he was familiar with an annual cycle, with divisions closely similar to those referred to by Amoraic rabbis, and still used in synagogues today. Not only do we thus have confirmation that the annual cycle was still operative in Luke's age and ambit; but we are even able to conjecture with some confidence what chapters and verses would be read on what sabbath or Sunday. We could hardly ask for more.

(ix) Matthew This conclusion agrees with some evidence which emerged from the analysis of the Gospel according to St Matthew in the first volume of my Speaker's Lectures. The basic structure of the Matthaean year was given, it appeared, in the division of the Gospel into stories broken by blocks of discourse; and the significance of these was that

if one story were allotted per sabbath according to the divisions in the Codex Alexandrinus, etc., the discourses were found to fall each on a Jewish feast—the Sermon on the Mount at Pentecost, the Missionary Discourse at New Year, the Parables of the Harvest at Tabernacles, the Church Order at Dedication, and the Apocalyptic Discourse at Passover.1 This meant that the sabbath readings were automatically fixed by the feasts, and no latitude at all was left to the interpreter: Matt. 23, for example, had to be the lesson for the first sabbath in the year, a kind of pre-Passover discourse; the sections of Matt. 24—25 had to run from the second sabbath through to Passover itself; Matt. 1 had to be the reading for the fifth sabbath, following the Easter octave, etc. Now, an examination of the relative sidrdt, on the assumption of an annual cycle, produced the then surprising suggestion that Matthew found inspiration not only from the feasts, but from the sabbath readings also.2 The first sidra is the stories of Creation, of Adam, and of Cain and Abel; and the onslaught of Matt. 23 culminates in the threat, 'that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel .. .' The second sidra is the Noah story. Now, for the second sabbath of the year Matthew virtually transcribes the Marcan Apocalyptic Discourse; but as soon as he has finished it he adds, 'As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man. For as in those days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of man' (Matt. 24.37 ff.). The third and fourth sabbaths are the celebration of Easter, but the fifth covers the last days of Abraham. Now, Matt. 1 begins with a genealogy which traces the descent of Jesus from Abraham; and sidra (5) closes with a genealogy of Abraham's descendants (Gen. 25.1-18). The annunciation of Jesus' birth is made by an angel to his father, just as the annunciation of Isaac's birth was; and in almost the same words, 'She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus', 'She will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac' (Matt. 1.21; Gen. 17.19). The sixth sidra tells of the struggle between Jacob and Esau, or Edom as he is also called. Jacob is blessed by his father, 'Let nations serve thee, and princes bow down to thee', and Esau plans in consequence to kill him (Gen. 27.29, 41). In the second unit of Matthew (2.1-12) the Gentile magi come and bow down to Jesus, 1 2

MLM, ch. 9 and Part II. The Matthaean cycle is set out in this book in Table VIII. MLM, pp. 227 f„ 236 f„ 239 f.

and Herod, the Edomite king whom he is to supplant as king of the Jews, plans to kill him. The seventh sidra describes the marriages of Jacob and the birth of his children, at first by Leah in face of Rachel's childlessness, later by Rachel also; Jacob grows rich and sets out for home. In the third unit of Matthew (2.13-23) Herod kills the innocents, and Matthew cites (somewhat surprisingly), 'Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be consoled because they are not' (AT); Joseph and his family spend a period in exile and set out for home. The series breaks off as Matthew takes up the Marcan thread at Matt. 3.1, but the occurrence of five 'fulfilments' of the sidrdt in a row like this, and especially of the names Abel, Noah, Abraham, Rachel, each in place, is a strong indication that Matthew's church was using an annual cycle of sidrdt, starting in Nisan. The hypothesis of an annual lectionary cycle beginning in Nisan as the use of the first-century A.D. western synagogue, Jewish and Christian, rests, then, upon a wide documentation, and explains numerous details which otherwise would remain puzzling. An annual liturgical cycle was the ancient pattern of Israelite worship, and the keeping of a Nisan new year in the West, and an end-of-Tabernacles new year in Babylon, is attested in biblical and post-biblical documents: in particular, the Nisan new year in the West is universal in D and R, and continues through to Tertullian. A pre-exilic practice of reciting the sacred tradition at Tabernacles, although controverted, is the most likely Sitz-im-Leben for the development of the Torah; and there is evidence for the spreading of such liturgical recitation round the lesser liturgical occasions during the exile. Several independent lines of argument suggest that the final redaction of the Pentateuch was made in the light of a week-by-week recital of the tradition in series: the logical nature of the sidra divisions, wherever the Redactors were not taking over ready-made blocks of material; the coincidence of Lev. 16, 18 and 23 with the positions of Atonement and Tabernacles in an annual Nisan calendar; the numerous step-by-step parallels with the work of the Chronicler; and the coincidence of the passages Zakor and Hahodesh with their positions in the same calendar. Externally, the Samaritan adoption of a lectionary use of the Torah, also on a yearly cycle, but with an autumn base-date and different divisions, suggests a familiarity with such a use in the B.C. period; and the dates of sabbath Sheqalim and the two curses chapters testify to the use of the sidrdt on the base of the old Tabernacles new year in the fourth or third century

in Babylon. The sidrdt are presupposed in the writings of Philo, and are thus evidenced for an annual lectionary system in the first century A.D. in the western Diaspora; and they explain a series of allusions to Genesis introduced at given places in the Gospel of Matthew, again on a Nisan base. The cumulative effect of such arguments is powerful: we are now in a position to test the hypothesis by setting the sidrdt alongside St Luke's Gospel. So shall we be able to see whether the evangelist has set out his account in liturgical order, and followed through all the parallels from the beginning.

APPENDIX

THE DECLINE AND DEMISE OF THE ANNUAL NISAN LECTIONARY CYCLE

The weakness of the annual cycle was its length, both for the Synagogue and for the Church. When the cycle was first instituted, and the tradition consisted of the J-E-D material, we might estimate that some three pages of Biblia Hebraica would be cantillated each sabbath: the recital of the sidra might take 10-15 minutes. With the accretion of Priestly and Redactoral material in the fourth century, the Torah nearly doubled in length, and the sidra must have taken at least 20 minutes (as it does today)—perhaps more, for there were seven readers1 among whom the reading had to be divided, with a blessing said by each, and they might not all be very fluent. But in the last centuries B.C. Hebrew became increasingly a dead language, and the practice of adding a Targum became widespread. The Targums are all paraphrastic translations: even Onkelos and the LXX have explanatory additions and periphrases, and Jonathan is considerably longer than the original. Where orthodoxy reigned, the sidra was read in Hebrew and the Targum recited alongside it,2 so that the hearing of the Torah portion of the readings could hardly have occupied less than three-quarters of an hour. But the sidra was not the only lesson. The haphfarah (prophetic lesson) was not so long, but, as I shall argue, it was about a chapter of our prophetic books, or about three chapters of our histories; and again there was a Targum to follow—at least a further fifteen minutes. The word haphfarah means 'closer', and from early times it had closed the reading part of the service; but in the last centuries B.C. a third canon was beginning to form, the so-called Writings, and a further, third lesson, and Targum, were normal in many synagogues, as long as the haphfarah.3 Such a length of time, perhaps an hour and a 1

m Meg. 4.2. m Meg. 4.4: t Meg. 4.13 acknowledges that there are synagogues of 'foreigners* who cannot speak Hebrew. 3 A third canon is testified in the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, and perhaps the habit of reading it:"... by the law and the prophets, and by others that have followed in their steps . . . not only the readers . . . the law itself and the prophecies and the rest of the books, have no small difference when they are spoken in their original language'. For the public reading of 1 Macc., see below, 2

52

quarter in all, spent listening, is wearisome and unedifying, and recalls the Lucan comment, 'Woe to you lawyers! for you load men with burdens hard to bear'.

(i) The Armenian Lectionary The Church was much quicker to ease this burden than the Synagogue. Pauline Christians had been taught that the Law was but our ffaiSay<»y6i; till Christ should come, and by Justin's time Jews in the Church were outnumbered by Gentiles1—and now by Gentiles who had never been God-fearers in the synagogue. So the system of lectionary parallels, which had seemed precious to the evangelists, quickly came to seem capable of abbreviation: Justin writes, 'On the day called S u n d a y . . . the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits'. 2 We are not to suppose that the Roman church ever omitted a Gospel reading on a Sunday: such is not only repugnant, but without any later parallel. Justin is using the general, not the alternative 'or', as when I might say, 'In the mornings I write letters or read', whereas I virtually always do both; or when Papias says that Mark wrote accurately td (w6 TOO Koptoo fl XsxQtvvx fl JTPAXOFEVRA, meaning that he wrote both; or when Ambrose says, 'cum vel Patriarcharum gesta vel Proverbiorum legerentur praecepta', meaning that there were readings from both. 3 Justin's church read a passage of the Gospel every Sunday, and a piece of the O.T. too; and he mentions the Gospel first, not because it was read first (which would again be unparalleled)4 but because it was the more significant reading to his public. But our concern is the tell-tale clause that has been added to the O.T. reading, 'as long as time permits'. We can hear the president saying, 'As time presses this morning, brethren, I propose that the lector limits our O.T. reading to Lev. 1, rather than the whole of Lev. 1—5.' Justin's expression, 'the writings of the prophets', is too loose to allow us to say whether there was a single O.T. lesson or several. Hegesippus says that the Law and the Prophets and the Lord were

pp. 132 ff.; for three lessons in the Church, law, prophets and writings, with the prophets last, see the next section. The earlier reading of the Writings may be inferred from its forbidding: t Yoma 13.1, 'We must not read from the Writings on the Sabbath'; cf. j Yoma XVI. 15c. 1 IApol„ 53. 2 IApol„ 67. 1 De Mysteriis, 1.1. 4 Michel, art. cit., col. 1145.

faithfully followed in every city,1 and at least two O.T. lessons were normal in Syria for centuries;2 a single O.T. lesson is first plainly testified by Chrysostom.3 From early days the Church's tendency was to abolish the Jewish year on which the lectionary was based. Paul reproached his Galatian converts, 'You observe days, and months, and seasons, and years!' (Gal. 4.10): the months are new moons, the seasons festal seasons, the days either such occasions as 9th Ab and Yom Kippur, or perhaps sabbath, the years the Jewish liturgical year. Gentile converts at Colossae were despised by Jewish Christians for laxity over the Jewish (-Christian) calendar: 'let no one pass judgment on you . . . with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath' (Col. 2.16). Ignatius wanted the observance of the sabbath to cease,4 and Jewish customs of all kinds are under pressure from the Pastorals on. 5 The Nisan year was maintained in the West by Tertullian, Victorinus of Pettau (d. 304), Zeno (d. 375) and Ambrose,6 but any observance of a Jewish calendar was being harried by Chrysostom at the end of the fourth century.7 It is almost unevidenced in Egeria's account of Palestinian liturgies in the 380s; even Passover had been replaced by Holy Week and Good Friday, and I have suggested that the Didascalia gives us an insight into this change in process a century and more before.8 With shortened O.T. lessons, and no festivals to link them together, nor any belief in the primacy of the Torah, it is no wonder that the old lectionary fell into desuetude in the Church. The sermons of the Fathers, and especially of Origen on the books of the Pentateuch and Joshua, covering the whole text in detail, are our principal evidence that the Church continued the lectio continua of the Law at all. In view of all this, we are fortunate to find plain relics of the annual Nisan cycle still surviving in our first Church lectionary, the Jerusalem Armenian lectionary of about A.D. 430.® There are three O.T. 1

Eus. H.E., iv. 22.3. Ap. Const., 8.4.6, 8.5.11, cf. 2.57.5/8. 3 In Hebr. Horn., 8.4, In Act. Horn., 29.3. 4 Magn., 8.9. ' Titus 1.10,14; 1 Tim. 1.7 ff.; 4.3-5. ' A. Dold, Das dlteste Liturgiebuch, pp. xcii f. 1 Horn. adv. Jud., 6.7 (PG 48.916), cf. M. Simon, Verus Israel (Paris 1948), pp. 379 ff. • See above, pp. 7-8. ' The lectionary was a part of the papers of the Armenian Convent of St James in Jerusalem, published in Armenian in 1948, and in a French translation by Dom A. Renoux as 'Un manuscrit du vieux lectionnaire armdnien de Jerusalem'; see above, p. 4, note 6. There is a discussion and tabulation of it in J. Wilkinson, ET, pp. 253-77. J

lections appointed for each of the Fridays in Lent,1 of which the first is from Deuteronomy, and the others from Job and Isaiah. The order is the old Jewish order, with the Torah first and the prophets as the closer. All the readings run serially from week to week, with some gaps. The Deuteronomy readings are as follows:

u

First Friday in Lent Second Friday in Lent Third Friday in Lent Fourth Friday in Lent Fifth Friday in Lent Sixth Friday in Lent

Deut. 6.4—7.10 Deut. 7.11—8.1 Deut. 8.11—9.10 Deut. 9.11-24 Deut. 10.1-15 Deut. 11.10-25

Lent is in February and March, and nearly coincides with the end of the Jewish Year: 1st Nisan would fall in the fifth or sixth week. The book of the Pentateuch being read under the old lectionary at this time of year therefore would be Deuteronomy. Not only are the Armenian lections from Deuteronomy, and in series, but the divisions coincide in part with the not very logical sidrdt. SidrS 45 ends at Deut. 7.11,2 sidrd 46 at Deut. 11.25. It looks as if the Church has selected the most edifying part of Deuteronomy, beginning with the Shema', and subdivided the old sidrdt so that the readings should not exceed the permitted time. The lectionary also has three O.T. lessons for each of the first four days of Holy Week: from Genesis, Proverbs and Isaiah/Zechariah— again the Jewish order. These readings also run in approximate series. The Genesis readings are as follows: Monday in Holy Week Tuesday in Holy Week Wednesday in Holy Week Thursday in Holy Week

Gen. 1—3 Gen. 6.9—9.17 Gen. 18.1—19.30 Gen. 22.1-18

Again, the Pentateuch readings are from the part of the Pentateuch covered by the old annual Nisan cycle; for Easter always falls on the Sunday after Passover (in early times), and the Sunday after 14th Nisan is always the third in Nisan. Again, the lections show affinities with the sidrdt: sidrdt 1, 2 and 4 begin respectively at Gen. 1.1, 6.9, and 18.1, exactly where the first three Armenian 1

2

Wilkinson, ET, pp. 364 f. Wednesdays and Fridays are the only weekdays for which lessons are provided in Lent, except in the first full week and Holy Week. The Wednesday lessons from the Torah are a complete series from Exod. 1.1—5.3, the reason for which is self-evident: there are only two Wednesday lessons, except in the first full week, the second lessons being mainly a series from Joel. The break in the Armenian lectionary is one verse earlier, at 7.10. The logical division is not obvious: NEB prints 7.11 as a paragraph on its own.

readings begin, and the fourth sidrS ends at Gen. 22. The stories of the Creation and Fall, of Noah and of the Binding of Isaac, might be thought suitable for Holy Week, but there is no obvious appropriateness in the Conception of Isaac and the Destruction of Sodom. It would look as if Lent had been given over to the 'best' sections of Deuteronomy at the end of the old year, and the first four Genesis sidrdt, suitably abbreviated, had been concentrated in the weekdays of the third week in the new year, Holy Week. If so, we are looking at the last ribbons of the old serial cycle. We do not lack evidence elsewhere of the serial reading of Genesis before Easter. There are serial Genesis lections for Holy Week in the oldest Syriac lectionary, c. 480,1 and for Easter Eve in the oldest Gallican lectionary, c. 500;2 and Genesis readings in Lent are testified in the sermons of Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, and Basil.3 But nowhere else is the provenance of the institution so plain as here, with a Deuteronomy series preceding a Genesis series, and substantial agreement with the old Jewish divisions.

(ii) The Origins of the Triennial Cycle The annual Nisan cycle, whose shallow rooting in the Church soon led to its withering in the noonday of a new liturgical year, had deeper roots in the life of the Synagogue. Nevertheless it had outgrown its strength, and by the middle of the second century we find the same pressure to subdivide and to abbreviate the readings. The Mishnah has a ruling, 'On Monday and Thursday and on Sabbath at Minhah (afternoon service) the regular portion of the week is read, and this is not reckoned as part of the reading for the succeeding sabbath.' 4 The Monday, Thursday and Sabbath Minhah services had readings by three lectors, as against sabbath when there were seven.5 Any alteration of the sidra in these additional services was forbidden: 'they may not take from them or add to them'. 6 The background of these rulings is made clear in the Talmud and Tosefta: 7 'Our Rabbis taught: The place (in the Torah) where they leave off in the morning service on Sabbath is the place where they begin at Minhah; the place where they leave off at Minhah (on Sabbath) is the place where they begin on Monday; the place where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Burkitt, op. cit. Dold, pp. xxviii flF. Righetti, SL, p. 239. m Meg. 4.1. m Meg. 4.2. m Meg. 4.1. b Meg. 31b; t Meg. 4.10.

they leave off on Monday is the place where they begin on Thursday; the place where they leave off on Thursday is the place where they begin on the next Sabbath. This is the ruling of R. Meir. R. Judah, however, says that the place where they leave off in the morning service on Sabbath is the place where they begin at (Sabbath) Minhah, on Monday, Thursday, and on the next Sabbath'. This passage makes good sense on the basis of an annual cycle of readings. R. Meir is a liberal, flourishing about 150, who is trying to lighten the liturgical burden. If the sidra is Lev. 1—5, and we have four services in the week, sabbath morning and the three additional services, why should we not subdivide the sidra, taking Lev. 1 at Sabbath Minhah (having left off in the morning at Exod. 40), Lev. 2 on Monday (having left off on Sabbath Minhah at the end of Lev. 1), Lev. 3 on Thursday, and Lev. 4—5 on the following Sabbath morning? In this way the whole sidra will be read every week; people will attend better to the shorter readings; and perhaps more people will come to the additional services. R. Judah is a conservative, of a generation later. We stopped the Sabbath morning reading at Exod. 40: very well, we will start on Sabbath Minhah at Lev. 1, and on Monday at Lev. 1, and on Thursday at Lev. 1, and the following Sabbath morning at Lev. 1. People need to hear the whole portion each sabbath, and for those who come in the week, they cannot know the Torah too well. As usual, the conservative won, and the Mishnah provides that the additional service lections shall be the whole and not a part of the portion of the succeeding sabbath's reading, without addition or abbreviation.1 There would have been no purpose for R. Meir's splitting of the sidra unless it were too long for convenience: so we have an indication both that the annual cycle was still operative in the West in the mid-second century, and that its length was causing it to break down. There could have been no motive for splitting the later triennial s'dharim into four: they were only about a chapter in length.2 1 1

m Meg. 4.1. Elbogen, JG, p. 160, computes on the basis of the minimum figure of three verses per reader (m Meg. 4.4) times seven readers per sabbath, as testified in the discussion in b Meg. 23a, that the whole Torah would be read in cycle in 2J years on R. Meir's principle, and 5i years on R. Judah's. On a 21-verse average reading, there would be something under 300 units, and the second figure would be correct; but there is no evidence for such a length of cycle having ever existed. As R. Meir's proposal takes the units four times as fast, it is not clear how Elbogen has arrived at the figure of 2i years (which is also unknown as a length of cycle elsewhere). But the whole basis of the computation is speculative. The Mishnah rule on the minimum reading—'He that reads in the Law may not read less than three verses'—was designed to prevent the professionalization of reading, with an expert cantillator doing the lion's

However, R. Judah was locking the door, like many a conservative, on a horse already escaping. Before the middle of the third century a debate took place in Babylon on the correct Torah lesson for sabbath Sheqalim, between Samuel who maintained the traditional Exod. 30.11 ff. (which I have discussed above), and Rab, who defended Num. 28. The Exod. 30 lesson commended itself in later discussion because there were rules provided for when the Sheqalim lesson was the same as that for the sabbath in the regular cycle; and Exod. 30.11 begins sidra 21, which does sometimes coincide with sabbath Sheqalim on the Babylonian (23rd Tishri) cycle. The passage continues, 'But according to the one who says that "My food which is presented to me" (Num. 28) is read—does (the portion containing that passage) fall about that time (in the cyclical reading of the Torah)?—Yes, for the people of Palestine, who complete the reading of the Pentateuch in three years.'1 The discussion is revealing, for it tells us not only that a triennial cycle was in operation in Palestine by the fifth century when the Talmud was set down; it tells us that it was in operation in Babylon three centuries before. Num. 28, as Samuel's disciples are quick to point out, would not be read anywhere near sabbath Sheqalim at the end of Shebat, the eleventh month, on the annual Babylonian cycle, but in Tammuz, the fourth month; as is the case in modern practice, and can be seen from the right-hand side of the diagram on p. 30. ITie Num. 28 lesson is, however, said to be justifiable on the basis of the triennial cycle prevalent in Palestine; and since it is implied that under this cycle it can coincide with sabbath Sheqalim we can find out the base date of the cycle. If the Pentateuch were evenly divided, a triennial cycle would have as its opening portions for the three years Gen. 1, and approximately Exod. 18 and Num. 13.2 The third year of the cycle covers 107 pages of Biblia Hebraica, and Num. 28 is on the 37th page; so that it would be read in a triennial share and the six other readers a nominal verse each; in practice an expert cantillator now does the entire reading, with the nominal participation of seven members of the community. We cannot infer an average reading from a rule governing a minimum reading. 1 b Meg. 29b. 2 Biichler, JQR, v, 432, divides the Pentateuch on the basis of references to Passover, and opens the second year at Exod. 12, and the third at Num. 6.22; he claims to be making the divisions on the basis of the 154/155 s'dhartm, but it seems (cf. the table in A. Guilding, The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship, p. 234) that the division can only be made in the way his scheme requires by taking the 165 s'dhartm elsewhere testified, and treating the surplus units as bisques, of which seven are taken in the first year, six in the second and none in the third. L. Zunz, according to Elbogen, JG, p. 540, began the third year at Num. 10.

cycle just over a third of the way through the third year. If the cycle began on 1st Nisan, it would be read at the beginning of Ab (the fifth month); if the cycle began on 23rd Tishri, it would be read at the end of Shebat. Since the latter is within days of Sheqalim, the base-date for the triennial cycle was in Tishri and not Nisan; 1 and 1

Elbogen, JG, pp. 540 f., deploys this argument and others respectfully to confound Biichler. It is worth noting why Biichler's Nisan triennial cycle seemed attractive, and why this attractiveness is meretricious. The following dates and days are culled by him, pp. 434 ff., from the Mekilta and Seder 'Olam (first- and second-century evidence); I have italicized those occurring in Scripture. The Exodus At Rameses Red Sea Song Marah Manna Massah

P

Sinai Lawgiving

19.1 ff.) 19 ff.) 34)

Th. 15th Nisan Mek. ad 12.21 S.O. 5, Sab. 17 th Nisan 14.2 Wed. 21st Nisan 14.9 a.m. 22nd Nisan 5 Sab. 24th Nisan 14.22 15 th Iyyar 28th Iyyar 17.2 (Sab. 29th) 5 Sun. 1st Sivan 19.1 Fri. 6th Sivan 16.1 (Sab.) 5 29th Ab 34.1

To which we may add:

§ Golden Calf

m

12.21-36) 12.37) (Exod. 14) 15.1-21) 15.22-6) 16) 17.1-7)

(Exod. 32)

17th Tammuz

m Taan. 4.6,

P which unfortunately does not fit Biichler's scheme. This block of dates is the

Ik linchpin of his argument for the priority of a triennial Nisan cycle: their number is impressive, and Biichler argues that they marked the readings of an m ideal year when 10th, 17th, 24th Nisan etc. all fell on a sabbath—hence the f days, and the incidence of sabbaths. He is not daunted by the fact that Seder jSip" 'Olam has two events one day later than the Mekilta; nor by the fact that there J ;V is no reading (on his hypothesis) for 1st or 8th Iyyar. He has to force the Manna story, which the Bible dates 15th Iyyar, on to 1st and 8th; Rephidim/Massah, which the haggadists date 28th/29th, on to 15th; 18—19.5, including the scriptural date of 1st Sivan at 19.1 on to 22nd Iyyar; and to assume that the Sr it; <st divisions in the Mekilta were the original s'dhartm, and not the s'dhartm of tradition, of which there are twelve, not eight. The dates are in fact no great cause for wonder, for the haggadists were only 'searching' Scripture. The Exod. 16 story gives the first mention of sabbath, which falls on the 7th day of the giving of manna. Since the story opens on the 15th day of the second month (Exod. 16.1), and the manna falls during the following night (.12ff., 16th) and for six nights before a sabbath (J22ff.), the latter must fall on 22nd Iyyar, and there will have been sabbaths on 1st, 8th, 15th, and 29th Iyyar also. The Mekilta assumes a 30-day Nisan and a 29-day Iyyar, and the days are then all given. The Seder 'Olam assumes a 30day Iyyar, which makes Pentecost (6th Sivan) a sabbath instead of a Friday. Exod. 14 is the festal lesson for the seventh day of Passover still to this day, so Biichler's contention for 21st Nisan is probably right; the haggadist arrived at the 17th for Rameses by subtracting the camping sites—Pihahiroth

this in turn yields the conclusion that it had its origin in Babylon and not Palestine, where the calendar began in the spring. Nor is this in the least surprising, for in the earlier period Palestine was the centre of orthopraxy; if R. Judah could stop R. Meir's mild reforms, he could stop a triennial cycle. But it is the same excessive length that underlies both moves. It is too much of a coincidence to suppose that Num. 28 was selected as an ideal Sheqalim lesson for its own sake, and just happened to fall on Sabbath Sheqalim in the third year of the triennial cycle by accident. It must be the other way round: the passage happened to fall on Sabbath Sheqalim in the third year of the cycle, and so commended itself as suitable for that sabbath; and was then adopted as the regular annual additional reacting. This means that Rab himself was familiar with a triennial cycle; and this carries the date of the provenance of the cycle back to about 200. So although R. Judah succeeded in stifling reform in his own generation, a means to shorter readings was already afoot in the East, which would one day be the norm in Palestine. The perseverance of the year beginning on 1st Nisan in the West all through the second century may be seen from several pieces of evidence. In the Mishnah the feasts are given in the order: Passover, Pentecost, New Year, Atonement, the Feast (of Tabernacles), Dedication, Purim. 1 The six New Moons on which messengers are sent out are given in the order: Nisan, Ab, Elul, Tishri, Chislev, Adar. 2 We even hear in a Jewish-Christian writing of the second century, the Kerygma Petrou [KP], fragments of which have been preserved by Clement of Alexandria, of a special 'First Sabbath', falling in Nisan. Fragment IV reads, 'And if the moon does not appear, they do not keep the so-called First Sabbath, nor do they keep New Moon, nor Unleavened Bread, nor the Festival, nor the Great Day'. 3 The reference is to the Jewish custom of not declaring the on 20th, Etham on 19th, Succoth on 18th, Rameses on 17th. Exod. 15.22 says that they went three days into the wilderness after the Red Sea, so they reached Marah on 24th. The Massah incident cannot be later than 28th Iyyar, as there is the battle with Amalek to follow before 1st Sivan. Moses goes up the mountain in Exod. 24, after the Law-giving, which tradition associated with Pentecost—hence on 7th Sivan, after Pentecost on 6th. He stayed there forty days and nights (Exod. 24.18), coming down therefore on 17th Tammuz to find the Golden Calf. There followed a second forty days and nights (Deut. 9.25), before the Exod. 34 Law-giving, which comes to 29th Ab. 1 m Meg. 3.5 f. 1 m R.H. 1.3. 3 Strom. VI. v. 39-41. The texts were first edited and commented upon by E. von Dobschutz, Das Kerygma Petri kritisch untersucht (T-U. xi. 1, Leipzig 1893): there is a recent comment on Fragment IV and other matters, with

new month on the thirtieth day of the old month unless the new moon was testified as having been seen.1 KP's community is plainly keeping a fixed cycle (of alternating 30- and 29-day months?), and is critical of the Jewish pragmatic use. The practice of observation was inconvenient because messages had to be sent out to all parts of the world in those months when there were festivals, so that their celebration would be simultaneous everywhere.2 KP limits himself to pointing out this inconvenience for Nisan (First Sabbath, Unleavened Bread) and Tishri (Tabernacles and Ydma, the Great Day— Atonement), and for New Moons in general. But 'the so-called First Sabbath' must be the first in Nisan, not that following Tabernacles,3 because the latter would be affected by the date of the Tishri new moon, and would require to be mentioned therefore with the Festival and the Great Day at the end of the list if that were in the author's mind. iSkrtt-

< i <

».,••(.

(iii) The Mishnah Megillah

,

The Mishnah mentions the reading cycle, without specifying an annual or triennial structure; but actually, as we have already seen, the debate between R. Meir and R. Judah implies an annual cycle still. Having set out the special readings for the four sabbaths in Adar, it continues, 'On the fifth (sabbath) they revert to the set order (likh'sidran, lit., to according to their order). At all these times they break off (from the set order in the reading of the Law): on the first days of the months, at the (Feast of the) Dedication, at Purim, on days of fasting, and at Maamads and on the Day of Atonement' (Meg. 3.4). The Torah is viewed as a continuous whole,4 read in a series of sidrdt. When an additional Torah reading is bibliography to date, by Prof. P. Nautin, 'Les Citations de la "Predication de Pierre" dans Cltoent d'Alexandrie, Strom. VI. v. 39-41', JTS xxv. 1 (1974). 1 m R.H. 1.3—2.1. * m R.H. 1.3. 1 Von Dobschtttz (op. cit., p. 44) suggested this as one explanation for the 'socalled first sabbath', the phrase being an approximation to the sabbath B're'shith; he also proposed the sabbath before Passover, sometimes called 'the great sabbath'—but 'great' is not the same as 'first'. Nautin produces a different translation, 'lis ne c616brent pas le sabbat, qu'ils disent etre la premiere chose c616brer)' (art. cit., p. 105), which is manifestly forced. 4 The omission of any verse was forbidden (m Meg. 4.4), in contradistinction from readings from the Prophets; backtracking was unthinkable (b Meg. 29b); the conclusion of Deut. 34 is followed immediately by the reading of Gen. 1. So although for practical purposes the Torah had to be divided into lections, the continuity of the whole was never lost sight of, and special readings were felt to be interruptions.

included in the service, such as Deut. 25.17-19 on sabbath Zakor, the lectio continua is thought of as being broken off. There is a series of such interruptions in Adar, and on the fifth sabbath (the first sabbath in Nisan) they revert to their set order (sedher)—i.e. the Nisan annual cycle. This interpretation of 'they break off' is confirmed by three supporting witnesses. First, it is required by the last clauses of the sentence, for if the cycle were interrupted by omitting the sidra (as has been suggested1), this would take place not only on the four special sabbaths, but also on the twelve new moons, two feasts, five fasts, and an unspecified number of station days (Maamads); and the cycle could then never be completed. There would be only about forty-four sabbaths available for the cycle in the year; and one could then never get round either a cycle of 54 sidrdt in one year, or 154/167 s'dhartm in three.2 Second, it agrees with a saying of R. Isaac Nappaha in the Talmud: 'When the New Moon of Adar falls on Sabbath, three scrolls of the Law are taken out (of the Ark), and read out of—from one the portion of the day, from one the portion of New Moon, and from one "When thou takest" (Exod. 30.11 ff, the Sheqalim paragraph).' 3 The day is sabbath Sheqalim and New Moon, both of them days specified for 'breaking off' in the Mishnah: but the cyclical portion is read as well, and first. Lastly, it is Jewish practice today for the four special sabbaths to carry their readings alongside the sidrdt. Thus the Mishnah reference to a sedher, which is our first express mention of a cyclical lectio continua reading of the Torah, is entirely consonant with the annual Nisan cycle whose history I have described. The times specified in Meg. 3.4 for interrupting the cycle (the Adar sabbaths, New Moons, Dedication, Purim, fasts, Maamads, Atonement) are, with the exception of the last, given appropriate lessons in Meg. 3.6: Num. 7 for Dedication, Exod. 17.8-16 for Purim, Num. 28.11-15 for New Moons, Gen. 1.1-23 for Maamads, Lev. 26.3-46 for Fasts. None of these lessons falls on the day required by the cycle (on either a Nisan or a 23rd Tishri base, with either an Annual Cycle (AC) or a Triennial Cycle (TC)): but the holy days would not normally coincide with sabbaths, and it is easy to understand their provision. The same lessons are in each case provided by the Talmud, and in most cases by the Tosefta. 4 Meg. 3.4 1

e.g. Biichler, p. 432. The numbers of s'dhartm vary in the different sources, cf. Elbogen, JG, pp. 160, 539. 3 b Meg. 29b. 4 b Meg. 31a-b; t Meg. 4.1-4.9.

2

does not mention 'breaking off' at the major feasts; with a Nisan AC one did not break off at Atonement and Tabernacles, for the Leviticus readings coincided with the cycle. Meg. 3.4 is continuous with Meg. 3.6; and Meg. 3.5, which does provide lessons for the major feasts, is a redactoral insertion. Danby says, 'The following paragraphs suggest that the text (of Meg. 3.4 ad fin., cited above) should read, "at the set feasts and at Maamads".' 1 But the absence of the words 'at the set feasts' suggests a different conclusion: that special lessons for Passover, Pentecost, New Year, Atonement and Tabernacles, as provided in Meg. 3.5, were a novelty at the end of the second century. This is confirmed by the fact that the Babylonian tradition, which has the same lessons for the minor feasts, hias considerable differences for the major ones: MISHNAH Meg. 3.5 TALMUD Meg. 31ab Exod. 12.21-51 Lev. 23.1 ff. Lev. 23.1 ff. Exod. 19—20.23 Deut. 16.9-12 Deut. 16.9-12 Num. 29.1-16 or Lev. 23.23 ff. Gen. 21 Gen. 22 (2nd day) Lev. 16 Atonement Lev. 16 Lev. 18 CMinhah) Tabernacles (1st day) Lev. 23.1 ff. Lev. 22.26—23.44 (Other days) Num. 29.17 ff., seriatim Num. 29.17 ff., seriatim — Lev. 22.26—23.44. (2nd day)

Passover

(1st day) (2nd day) Pentecost (1st day) (2nd day) New Year (1st day)

The apologetic note of the Talmud—'Nowadays that we keep two days ...'—and the invention of such a bogus festival as the second day of Pentecost,2 makes it plain that the Mishnah lections for the major festivals (except for Atonement and the first day of Tabernacles) have grown up in recent times: the Babylonians believe them to be secondary, and have put them on the second days of the feasts, or omitted them. Only those lections (for Atonement and Tabernacles) are in common which are abbreviations of the old Nisan cyclical readings. The other lections, in both communities, are independent second-century innovations. The aim in the West was 1

H. Danby, The Mishnah (Oxford 1933), p. 205, n. 12. 'And on the Atonement' should also be omitted at the end of 3.4; Atonement is not provided with a lesson in 3.6 but in 3.5, and note the natural ending, 'and at Maamads'. 2 Pentecost in the O.T. was the concluding day of the Paschal Week of Weeks, as the name implies in Hebrew and in Greek, and no second day is ever mentioned.

to impress the observance of the holy day,1 in the East to show its significance.

(iv) The Growth of the Triennial Cycle The Annual Cycle was still in use in the West a century later. The following discussion in the Babylonian Talmud is revealing;2 it relates to the difficulties arising from the fact that the portion set for sabbath Sheqalim, Exod. 30.11-16, in the eastern tradition follows on directly at the end of sidra 20, Exod. 27.20—30.10, and is the opening paragraph of sidra 21, Exod. 30.11—34 end—and the Sheqalim sabbath might coincide with either of these two cyclical readings. (I have substituted the references in figures where the Talmud refers to passages by their opening words; T'tsawweh, 'You shall command', for sidra 20, for example). 'It was stated: If it (sabbath Sheqalim) falls when sidra 20, Exod. 27.20—30.10, is read, then six persons read from Exod. 27.20 to Exod. 30.10 (i.e. the whole of sidra 20), and one from Exod. 30.11 to Exod. 30.16 (the Sheqalim paragraph). Abaye remarked, If that is done, people will say that that is where they stop (i.e. since seven readers were normal for the sidra, people will think that sidra 20 does not finish at Exod. 30.10 but at 30.16, and the significance of the Sheqalim paragraph will be missed). No, said Abaye: six read from Exod. 27.20 to Exod. 30.16 (i.e. the sidra and the Sheqalim paragraph together), and one repeats and reads from Exod. 30.11-16 (i.e. the Sheqalim paragraph alone, thus stressing its independent importance).' 'If it (sabbath Sheqalim) falls on sidra 21, Exod. 30.11—34 end, itself, R. Isaac Nappaha says that six read from Exod. 30.17 to Exod. 34 end (i.e. the whole sidra except for the Sheqalim paragraph which opens it), and one from Exod. 30. 11-16 (the Sheqalim paragraph). Abaye strongly demurred to this, saying, Now people will say that we are reading backwards! (because the first verses are read last). No, said Abaye: six read to Exod. 34 end (i.e. the whole sidra), and one repeats from Exod. 30.11-16 (the Sheqalim paragraph).' Several points emerge from these two quotations. First, the three cyclical readings which are referred to under the names T'tsawweh, Ki Tissd' and Wayyaq'hel correspond to sidrdt 20, 21 and 22 in the traditional cycle, and are still known under these names. This is the 1

J

As western Judaism came under increasing imperial pressure in the second century, the feasts became more important in themselves as a means of holding the people together. b Meg. 29b-30a.

first rabbinic evidence of cyclical readings in units with which we are familiar, and shows the annual cycle to be firmly established by the fourth century. Second, of the two rabbis cited, R. Isaac Nappaha was a Palestinian Amora, living about A.D. 300; Abaye was a Babylonian of a generation later. Since the whole discussion presupposes an annual cycle, it is clear that both in Palestine and in Babylon an annual cycle was in use (even if another system was also in use). Thirdly, R. Isaac, like Abaye, is using an annual cycle beginning on 23rd Tishri, the Babylonian base-date, since the Sheqalim paragraph can only coincide with sidrdt 20 and 21 from then, and never from 1st Nisan. So around A.D. 300 there were rabbis in the West who were using an annual cycle beginning on 23rd Tishri. We can put these details together into a provisional picture. Philo, Matthew, and R. Judah's rulings in the Mishnah show that the annual cycle was in operation in the West in the first and second centuries A.D.; Matthew, the Mishnah lists of feasts and months, and Kerygma Petrou show that in the same period the cycle still began in Nisan. R. Meir's attempt to subdivide the lections shows that the system was felt to be onerous by 150, and Rab was using a triennial system in Babylon fifty years later. R. Isaac Nappaha was still using an annual cycle in the West in 300, but now one based on 23rd Tishri; the influence of the Babylonian communities was increasing, and in time its alternative base-date came to be more and more widely used, either with an annual cycle (R. Isaac, and ultimately all Jewry), or in the laxer triennial form. The triennial cycle was never fixed like the sidrdt. In some versions it is likely that there were 154 s'dhartm, corresponding to the number marked in the Masora. 1 In the Yemen a division into 167 s'dhartm has survived.2 The divisions in the Mekilta and Midrash Rabba are other probable indications of triennial readings, the former perhaps going back to the beginnings of the system.3 The Mekilta tractates are eight4 in number for the continuous section covered, Exod. 12.1—23.19, against twelve in the Yemenite tradition, and only four of these 1

This was first conjectured by S. L. Rapoport in 1846, in G. Pollack (ed.), Halikot Kedem: see I. Sonne, BRPOS II, xxv. But some of the units are less than the stipulated 21 verses, and the minimum number of sabbaths in three years is 156. 2 ibid., p. xxvi. 3 Elbogen, JG, p. 160. But the Mekilta was revised and systematized after the second century; cf. J. Bowker, TRL, p. 70. 4 The Mekilta tractate divisions are rather long as units for a triennial cycle; the Pentateuch, at this rate, would yield only about 130 s'dhartm. Nor does the tractate 'Amalek (18.8-27) provide the full 21 verses.

begin at the same verse; nor do the thirty-seven chapters of Lev. R. agree with the twenty-five s'dhartm. There is a reference in Lev. R. 3.6 to a reading beginning at Lev. 2.10, which does not agree with any sedher. In view of such disparity, it seems likely that from the third to the fifth centuries the annual cycle steadily broke down in the West under its own weight, and was replaced in each community by shorter readings in a three-year cycle, formed ad hoc, without any generally accepted set of lections. The advantage of the triennial cycle was its brevity; but such variety of use was no match for Babylonian orthodoxy, which clung to the ancestral Annual Cycle. It was still widespread in the days of Moses Maimonides, but was in desuetude by the seventeenth century.1 The probability has always been on general grounds that the simple system should have preceded the complex. This last decade has seen the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England replace an annual system of readings with a triennial or biennial system, and it would seem likely that the same was true of a Jewish system, whose liturgical roots are an annual cycle of feasts from time immemorial. All the evidence which we have examined points in the same direction. The traditional Jewish annual cycle from 23rd Tishri is very old—it dates from Babylonia in the fourth century B.C. The triennial cycle on the same base, favoured by Elbogen and Mann, is an adaptation of this from the early centuries A.D. Biichler's triennial cycle on a Nisan base is a pipe-dream. The 'free' use, without a lectionary, in the Church, assumed by many Christian scholars, is a development from the breakdown of the Jewish-Christian year from the second century on. The original annual cycle, on the biblical Nisan base, was the lectionary in the West in Synagogue and Church until at least the second century A.D.; and would have formed the basis for the devotion and preaching of St Luke. 1

Elbogen, JG, pp. 160 f.

TABLE I The Traditional Sidrdt and Haphtarot A. FESTIVALS AND HOLY DAYS NISAN Great Sabbath (II) Passover, 1st Day 2nd Day 3rd Day 4th Day 5th Day 6th Day Sabbath 7th Day 8th Day

Exod. 12.21-51 (b) Lev. 22.26—23.44 (m)b Exod. 13.1-16 (b) Exod. 22.24—23.19 b Exod. 34.1-26 b Num. 9.1-14 b Exod. 33.12-34.26 b Exod. 13.17—15.26 b Deut. 15.19—16.17 b

SIVAN Pentecost 1st Day 2nd Day

Exod. 19—20.23 b Ezek. 1, 3.1-12 b Deut. 15.19—16.17 (b 16.9-) Hab. 3 b

Theophany to Ezek. Theophany from mt.

AB 9th, a.m. p.m.

Deut. 4.25-40 b Exod. 32.11-14, 34.1-10

Silent Assembly •Seek the LORD'

TISHRI New Year 1st Day 2nd Day Tashltkk Sabbath Atonement, a.m. pan. Tabernacles 1st Day 2nd Day Sabbath 8th Day 23rd, Simhath Torah

Mai. 3.4-24 Elijah's Coming Josh. 5.2-6.1 b Passover at Gilgal 2 Kings 23.1-10 b, 21- •5 Josiah's Passover

Ezek. 37.1-15 b 2 Sam. 22 b Isa. 10.32—12.6 b

Jer. 8.13—9.23 b Isa. 55.6—56.8

Life renewed Deliverance Song Deliverance & Psalm

Gen. 21 b (m Num. 29.1-6) 1 Sam. 1—2.10 b Gen. 22.1-19 b Jer. 31.2-20 b 20-40 Mic. 7.18-20 Hos. 14.2-10 Joel 2.15-27 Isa. 57.14—58.14 b Lev. 16 mb Jonah b Lev. 18 b

Barren visited Dear son remembered Sins cast in sea Israel, return Sanctify a fast Chosen fast Ninevites repent

Lev. 22.26—23.44 (m)b Lev. 22.26-23.44 b Exod. 33.12—34.26 b Deut 14.22—16.17 b

Nations keep Feast Solomon's Feast Last Battle Solomon's Blessing

Zech. 14 b 1 Kings 8.2-21 b Ezek. 38.18—39.16 b 1 Kings 8.54-66 b

Deut. 33—34, Geo. 1- -2.3 b Josh. 1.1-18 (b 1 Kings 8.2-21

Joshua and the Law Solomon's Feast)

KISLEV Dedication, 8 Days

Num. 7—8.4 (serially) mb

Zech. 3—4.7 (sab.) b

Candlestick

ADAR Sabbath Sheqalim Zakor Parah Hahodesh

Exod. 30.11-16 mb Deut. 25.17-19 mb Num. 19 mb Exod. 12.1-20 mb

2 Kings 12.1-17 b 1 Sam. 15.2-34 b Ezek. 36.16-36 b Ezek. 45.18—46.18 b

Jehoash's Shekels Amalek and Agag Land Cleansed New Passover, etc.

(The relevant sacrificial laws from Num. 28 f. are also read through Passover and Tabernacles.)

TABLE I (contd) B. SABBATHS GENESIS 1. 1—6.8 2. 6.9—11 end

In the Beginning Noah

Isa. 42.5—43.10 Isa. 54.1—55.5

3. 12—17 4. 18—22 5. 23-25.18

Go And he appeared Sarah's Life

Isa. 40.27—41.16 2 Kings 4.1-37 1 Kings 1.1-31

The Descendants And he went forth And he sent And he dwelt At the End And he drew near

Mai. 1.1—2.7 Hos. 12.12—14.9 Hos. 11.7—12.11 Amos 2.6—3.8 1 Kings 3.15—4.1 Ezek. 37.15-28

12. 47.28—50.26

And he lived

1 Kings 2.1-12

EXODUS 13. 1—6.1 14. 6.2—9 end 15. 10—13.16 16. 13.17—17 17. 18—20 18. 21—24 19. 25—27.19

The Names And I appeared Go in When he let them go Jethro The Ordinances The Offering

Isa. 27.6—28.13 Ezek. 28.25—29.21 Jer. 46.13-28 Judg. 4.4—5.31 Isa. 6.1—7.6 Jer. 34.8-22, 33.25 f. 1 Kings 5.26—6.13

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

25.19—28.9 28.10—32.2 32.3—36 end 37—40 41—44.17 44.18—47.27

20. 27.20—30.10 b You shall command

Ezek. 43.10-27

21. 30.11—34b 22. 35—38.20 b

When you take And he assembled

1 Kings 18.1-39 1 Kings 7.40-50

23. 38.21—40

The Sum

1 Kings 7.51—8.21

LEVITICUS 24. 1—6.7 25. 6.8—8 end 26. 9—11

And he called Command On the eighth Day

Isa. 43.21—44.23 Jer. 7.21—8.3 b 2 Sam. 6—7.17

27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

If she conceives The Leper After the Death Holy Say On the Mountain In my Statutes

2 Kings 4.42—5.19 2 Kings 7.3-20 Ezek. 22.1-16 Amos 9.7-15 Ezek. 44.15-31 Jer. 32.6-27 Jer. 16.19—17.14

NUMBERS 34. 1—4.20

In the Wilderness

Hos. 1.10—2.20

35. 36. 37. 38.

Take the Census When you set up Send you Korah

Judg. 13.2-25 Zech. 3—4.7 Josh. 2.1-24 1 Sam. 11.14—12.22

12—13 14—15 16—18 19—20 21—24 25—26.2 26.3—27 end

4.21—7 end 8—12 13—15 16—18

39. 19—22.1

The Statute

Judg. 11.1-33

40. 22.2—25.9 41. 25.10—29

Balak Phinehas

Mic. 5.6—6.8 1 Kings 18.46—19.21

42. 30—32 43. 33—36

Tribes The Stages

Jer. 1—2.3 Jer. 2.4—28, 4.1 f

•He that created' Covenant, waters of Noah Seed of Abraham Birth to old woman Concubine and successor Jacob and Esau •Jacob fled' Jacob strove with God Righteous sold Dreams and wisdom Ephraim & Judah reunited • Time to die Prophets rejected God against Pharaoh Oracle against Egypt Song after victory The Vision of God Freeing Hebrew slaves Tabernacle, Temple gifts Altar of Burnt Offering False gods confounded Tabernacle, Temple built Shekinah descends No sacrifices Sacrifices invalid Consecration and death Naaman the leper Lepers of Samaria Blood and Incest Holy life rejected Priests' marriage, etc. Redemption of land Exile for idolatry Number of people, wilderness Nazirite Candlestick Sending of spies Moses, Samuel rejected War with Moab and Edom Balak and Balaam Zeal of Phinehas, Elijah 1st Haph. of Rebuke 2nd Haph. of Rebuke

DEUTERONOMY 44. 1—3.22 The Words 45. 3.23—7.11 And I besought

Isa. 1.1-27 Isa. 40.1-26

46. 7.12—11.25

When

Isa. 49.14—51.4

47. 11.26—16.17

Behold

Isa. 54.11—55.6

48. 16.18—21.9

Judges

Isa. 51.12—52.13

49. 21.10—25

When you go forth

Isa. 54.1-10

50. 26—29.9

When you come

Isa. 60.1-22

51. 29.10—30 end You stand 52. 31 And he continued 53. 32 Give ear

Isa. 61.10—63.9 Isa. 65.6—66.8 Hos. 14

54. 33—34

Josh. 1.1-10

This is the Blessing

3rd Haph. of Rebuke 1st Haph. of Consolation 2nd do. Discipline of suffering 3rd do. Righteousness rewarded 4th do. Justice blessed 5th do. God's kindness 6th do. Israel above nations 7th do. 'I will repay* Repentance and healing (Continuity)

The traditional lections may be found in the Jewish Year Book. The references given here have been adjusted to the numeration in the English versions. m signifies 'witnessed in the Mishnah' (m Meg. 3.4-6). b signifies 'witnessed in the Babylonian Talmud' (b Meg. 29—31 mainly). The witness of Mishnah and Talmud is to the opening verse only, and not always that. The names of the sidrdt are the traditional Hebrew names, drawn from the opening words or subject: I have put these into English. The right-hand column gives the connection between sidra and haphtarah as understood by J. H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs (London 1947).

TABLE II The Chronicler's Lectionary System (The numbers follow the modern annual cycle. * signifies the Chronicler's additions to Kings, (*) a change of Kings order. Italics signify striking coincidences, and/or more general parallels.)

NISAN

GENESIS

JOSHUA

EZRA

1—6.8 Creation. Fall. Cain. Genealogy.

1—3 Be strong. Rahab. 1* Sheshbazzar. Israel returns to land. Waters part for Israel to enter promised Land.

2. 6.9—11 Noah. Babel. Genealogy.

4—6 Circumcision. Passover. Walls of Jericho fall to trumpets and shout.

3—6* Jeshua and Zerubbabel raise temple and walls to trumpets and shout. Passover.

3. 12—17 Abraham (a): In Canaan by Bethel and Ai. Promise to inherit land from peoples. Circumcision. 5 Kings: Melchizedek.

7—12 Actum. Ail Bethel. Heading Law. Mixing with peoples, 5 Kings: Adonizedek.

7—10* Confession of Ezra. Intermarriage with peoples.

PASSOVER

NEHEMIAH

4. 18—22 Abraham (b): 13—16 Joshua Birth and binding of conquers Canaanites Isaac. Promise renewed, and allots land to Genealogy. first five tribes.

PENTECOST

7* Returning Families.

5. 23—25.18 Abraham (c): Sarah. Rebecca. Keturah. Genealogy.

17—22 Joshua continues to allot land to remaining seven tribes.

8* Ezra reads, Jeshua interprets Law.

6. 25.19—29.8 Jacob and Esau.

23—24 Rehearsal from 9* Rehearsal from Abraham. Covenant. Abraham. Covenant. (Jeshua).

7. 28.10—32.3 Jacob and Laban. Leah. Rachel. Birth of Patriarchs.

1 CHRONICLES 1.1-42* Adam-Noah (10). Descendants of sons of Noah (70) Shem-Abram (10). Descendants of sons of Abraham (70).

8. 32.4—36 Jacob and Esau. Sons of Israel. Esau's descendants. Kings and chiefs of Edom.

1.43—2* Kings and Chiefs cfEdom, Sons of Israel (—Gen. 35.22ff.). Judah clam.

9. 37—40 Judah tries to save Joseph. Judah and Tamar. Joseph in prison.

3* Sons of David.

10. 41—44.17 Joseph in power. Judah and brothers. Simeon hostage.

4* Villages of Judah. Simeon.

11. 44.18—47.27 Joseph recognized. Israel to Egypt. Sons of Patriarchs.

5—7.13* Families cf Reuben. Gad, half-Manasseh, Levi. Issachar, Benjamin, NaphtaU.

12. 47.28—50 Jacob blesses Manasseh and Ephraim, the Patriarchs (... Joseph, Benlamth): dies.

7.14—8* Manasseh, Ephraim. Benjamin.

EXODUS 1—6.1 Oppression In Egypt. Moses kills Egyptian, draws water from well. Moses raised to deliver Israel, enter land of Jebusita, etc.

10,11(*) Death of Saul (.Oppression under Philistines). David made king, takes Jebus. Mighty Mm draw water from well.* Benaiah kills Egyptian.

14. 6.2—9 Egypt smitten with seven plagues. Moses' Thirty (6.14 ff.).

12* David's army. Amasai chief of Thirty. Ark from Kiriath-Jearim: God 'breaks forth'.

15. 10—13.16 Last three plagues. Passover. Exodus.

13—14 David smites Philistines.

16. 13.17—17 Red Sea. Moses' Song. Timbrels and Dancing (15.17). Manna. Meribah. Amalek.

15—16* Ark processed Into Jerusalem. Cymbals and Dancing. David's Song by Asaph.

17. 18—20 Jethro. Sinai. X Commandments.

17—18 Temple adumbrated. (17.21) David's victories over Philistines.

18. 21—24 Laws of Covenant: so. 'enemies driven out, bounds from Red Sea to sea of Philistines desert to Euphrates'.

19—20 Syrians, Edomites, Ammonites ... to the River.

19. 25—27.19 Tabernacle (a): Pattern of Ark, structure Altar, Court, etc.

21—22 Census. Site of Temple. Temple planned.

20. 27.20—30.10 Tabernacle (b): Pattern of Priests' clothes, consecration, Incense, Altar.

23—28* Levites, priests, acolytes, officers for Temple. David gives Solomon the pattern.

21. 30.11—34 Tabernacle (c): Half-shekel. Bezalel and Ohollab. Golden Calf. Moses' Visions. 22. 35—38.20 Tabernacle (d): Freewill Offering. Bezalel and Ohollab. Construction. 23. 38.24-40 Tabernacle (e): Gold. Priests' clothes. Induction. Glory-cloud.

NEW YEAR

YOM KIPPUR

2 CHRONICLES 29*; 1—2 Freewill Offering. Solomon's vision. Huram. 1 Construction.

5 Induction. Glory-cloud.

LEVITICUS 24. 1—5 Burnt Offering. Cereal Offering. Peace Offering. Sin Offering. Swearing.

6.1-23 Solomon before Altar. 'Hear and forgive'. Swearing.

25. 6—8 Burnt Offering, Cereal Offering. Sin-Offering. Guilt Offering. Ordination of Aaron and sons.

6.24-end 'If they confess ... hear and forgive.' 'Let thy priests be clothed with salvation'.*

26. 9—11 Sacrifice: fire from heaven. Priests replaced. Clean and Unclean.

7—8.10 Sacrifice: fire from heaven.* Solomon's building.

27. 12—13 Uncleanness: Women, Leprosy.

8.11—9 Solomon's wife away from ark.* Queen of Sheba.

28. 14—15 Lepers. Discharge.

10 Division of Kingdom.

29. 16—18 Atonement. Worship only for God at Tabernacle, not he-goats. Marriage and consanguinity.

11 Priests secede to Rehoboam at Temple.* Jeroboam's he-goats.* Rehoboam marries cousins.*

30. 19—20 Holiness code.

12 Rehoboam forsakes Law. Shishak.

TABERNACLES 31. 21—24 Priests' cleanness. Feasts. Shewbread, lamps, blasphemy.

13 Abijah and Jeroboam. Shewbread and lamps.*

32. 25—26.2 Jubilee, Redemption. (If faithful, peace, 5 chase 100).

14—15 Asa destroys Idols.' Peace. Chases million Cushites *

33. 26.3—27 But if not... Vows.

16 Asa unfaithful: War, Disease,* Death.

NUMBERS 34. 1—4.20 First Numbering of Host.

17*, 18 Jehoshaphat's host .* With Ahab to Ramoth-gilead.

35. 4.21—7 Levites (Kohathltes.). Judgement by Ordeal. Nazirites. Offerings.

19—20* Judges. Levites and priests to judge. Moabite War (Kohathltes).

36. 8—12 Lamps. Passover (2nd month). Quails and 70 elders. Miriam's leprosy.

21—22 Jehoram, Ahaziah. Lamp for David.

37. 13—15 Spies. Sacrifices.

23—24 Joash. Jehoiada. Zecharlah.*

38. 16—18 Priestly prerogatives. Korah and incense. Priests' incomes.

25—26 Amaziah and Edom. Host numbered.* Uzziah's incense and leprosy.*

39. 19—22.1 Red heifer. Edom refuses passage (2 Chron. 20). Brazen Serpent. Sihon, Og.

27—28 Jotham. Ahaz.

40. 22.2—25.9 Moab obstructive (2 Chron. 20). Balaam (2 Chron. 18).

29 Hezekiah: (a) 2nd month. Passover preparations (Num. 9).*

41. 25.10—30.1 Second Numbering. Feasts and Offerings.

30—31.3 Hezekiah: (b) Passover kept. Provision of offerings.*

42. 30.2—32 Vows. Midianites. Portion of spoil to Eleazar and Levites. Gad, Reuben.

31.4-13 Hezekiah: (c) Portions and Tithes to priests and Levites.*

43. 33—36 Stages of Journey. Borders. Levites' cities and suburbs. Zelophedad.

31.14-end Hezekiah: (d) Reckoning of Levites by cities and suburbs.

DEUTERONOMY 44.. 1—3.22 Moses encourages People (3.22).

32.1-8 Hezekiah: (e) encourages people (32.7).*

45. 3.23—7.11 Commandments. Driving out nations greater and mightier.

32.9-23 Hezekiah: (f) Sennacherib.

46. 7.12—11.25 Trying Israel to know all his heart. Wealth.

32.24 Hezekiah: (g) Wealth. Babylon Embassy.

47. 11.26—16.17 High places forbidden. Jerusalem worship. Passover.

33 Manasseh builds high places. Augury, sorcery, wizards, fire (Deut. 18). Amon.

48. 16.18—21.9 Destroy Asherah. Host of Heaven not to be worshipped. King to study book of taw under priests.

34 Jostah destroys Asherahs, etc. Follows book of law produced by Hilkiah.

49. 21.10—25 Various laws.

35 Josiah's Passover and death.

50. 26—29.8 Blessing and Curse. Exile foretold: no mercy on weak.

36.1-21 Last Kings. Exile. No mercy on weak.*

51. 29.9—34 (As many readings as are necessary) Repentance and Return. Moses' Song, Blessing. Death.

36.22-end Cyrus authorizes Return.*

LUKE AND THE ANNUAL TORAH CYCLE I have now, I hope, given sufficient reasons for believing two theses to be plausible: first, that Luke wrote his Gospel as a cycle of liturgical gospels, to be used round the year in fulfilment of the Old Testament lections; and second, that in the first century the Torah cycle in use in the Western Diaspora of Judaism and Christianity was an annual cycle beginning on the first sabbath in Nisan. We have now to set the Lucan Gospel side by side with the sidrdt, and see how far the theory is confirmed by the presence of convincing parallels. Two immediate problems pose themselves. Where should we take the Lucan cycle to begin? And upon what principle shall we divide the Lucan text? There might seem to be three places where Luke could begin: the first Sunday in Nisan, following the Torah cycle; Jewish New Year on 1st Tishri; and the Sunday after the Easter octave, following Matthew. Of these the last is plainly to be preferred. The logic of the Gospel is such as to require the reading of the Passion story at Passovertide, and of the Resurrection at Eastertide: how could one celebrate the Lord's death and rising again in Lent (were Luke 1 read on Nisan I) or high summer (were Luke 1 read in Tishri)? All the earliest lectionaries—indeed, virtually all lectionaries—have this arrangement: 1 since we have accepted the argument that the use of the Gospel in the fourth century is the best guide to its original purpose, we can hardly reject the rock-solid evidence for the use of the end of the Gospel at Passover-Easter. Nor is it credible that Luke should adopt a different starting-point from Matthew. If the first evangelist was writing an annual cycle of liturgical gospels starting after the Easter octave (as I have argued in Midrash and Lection in Matthew),2 then the third evangelist will be likely to have done the same. All Jewish major festivals but Pentecost are eight-day 1

The earliest lectionaries that we have are those of the Armenian church in Jerusalem (c. 430, cf. pp. 53-6 above), the Syriac church (c. 480, cf. p. 4, n. 7), the Gallican church (c. 500, cf. p. 5, n. 1), and the Greek church (ninth-century MSS, cf. p. 4, n. 8). Their witness agrees with the testimony of Egeria in the late fourth century. I have made an abbreviated table of the Holy Week and Easter lections Of these authorities in MLM, p. 433. 2 ch. 9, and Part II.

feasts, and all early lectionaries celebrate Easter as an octave—we even find reference to the eighth day from Easter in St John. 1 So it would seem that Luke will have celebrated Easter on the third Sunday in the year (the Sunday after 14th Nisan), its octave on the fourth, and he will have begun his Gospel cycle, if any, on the fifth. As regards the divisions of Luke, we have three indications, which sometimes coincide and sometimes not: the logic of the Gospel, with its introductory and closing formulae, the divisions numbered in Codex Alexandrinus and other manuscripts, and the edentations in the Bodmer Papyrus, p75. Of these our most dependable resource is Luke himself, for he is given to opening his pericopae with a rubrical formula: 'And it came to pass as h e . . . ' , 'In the meantime, when so many thousands of the multitude had gathered together that they trod upon one another, he began to say . . . ' , 'He went on his way through towns and villages, teaching, and journeying toward Jerusalem. And some one said to him . . . ' Often a new lection is introduced by a question or comment that serves as a foil: 'He was praying in a certain place, and when he ceased, one of his disciples said to him, Lord, teach us to pray, . . . ' , 'The apostles said to the Lord, Increase our f a i t h ! . . O n the other hand, when Luke breaks the continuity, he sometimes tells us that the next scene happened 'at that very hour', and when this is the case presumably the evangelist means the two pieces to be taken together. Sometimes the rubrical pointers are quite elaborate, as in the opening two chapters, where Luke presents a complex diptych of John and Jesus in which the readings are marked off in several ways. Elizabeth closes the first with her thanksgiving, 'Thus the Lord has done to me . . . ' (1.25), Mary the second with the Magnificat (1.4655), Zechariah the third with the Benedictus (1.68-79), Simeon nearly closes the fourth with the Nunc Dimittis and 'Behold this child . . . ' (2.29-32, 34-5). The first is ended by Zechariah going to his home (1.23), the second by Mary returning home (1.56), the fourth by the holy family returning into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth (2.39), the fifth by Jesus' going down with his parents and coming to Nazareth (2.51). There are notes of time at the end of the first two: for five months Elizabeth hid herself (1.24); in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent (1.26): 'And Mary remained with her about three months' (1.56). At the end of the remaining three readings there are notes of progress: 'And the child grew and became strong in spirit' (1.80), 'And the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom' (2.40), 'And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature . . . ' (2.52). These indications of the close of self1

John 20.26.

contained units coincide exactly with the division of the story by theme, and make a fivefold division a virtual certainty:1 1.5-25 1. 26-56 1.57-80 2. 1-40 2. 41-52

Annunciation of the Birth of John Annunciation of the Birth of Jesus: Visitation Birth, Circumcision and Naming of John Birth, Circumcision and Presentation of Jesus Jesus Aged Twelve

Luke's formulae do not always yield certain breaks, but there are few places of doubt. When I suggested a lectionary theory for Matthew, I relied, with only minimal adjustments, on the 69 numbered divisions in the Codex Alexandrinus and other Greek uncials as the lections for the Matthaean year.2 Matthew was a Gospel for a Jewish-Christian church, and there were many Jewish-Christian churches through to the fourth-century for whom Matthew's lessons for Jewish feasts were ideal; it is not surprising, therefore, that Matthew's own divisions survived nearly intact in so many MSS. Luke, however, was written for a Gentile church which soon lost its enthusiasm for long O.T. readings: as Justin says, already in the 150s, 'the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits.' 3 We might have expected therefore that the anchoring of the Lucan readings to O.T. lections would be less firm, and in consequence that the Lucan divisions themselves would be more liable to flux; and this is the case. However, the divisions in Alexandrinus, etc.,4 are far from worthless. For example, the whole of Luke 1 is the Proem in A, and Luke 2 is divided into four units. This means that Luke 3 comprises the 6th and 7th lections, which is precisely what the Lucan formulae suggest; perhaps the margins became worn and torn in the first leaves of an earlier codex, and the places of division were guessed up to the 6th which was marked at 3.1. From Luke 4—9 the A divisions are mostly just where the rubrical formulae would suggest, and it is not until the Journey that additional, and 1

R. Laurentin, Structure et theologie de Luc l-ll (Paris 1957), pp. 32 f., gives a sevenfold division, adding the Visitation and the Presentation as separate units; but he does not stick so closely to the criteria of division which he and I have in common—for instance, he cites no 'conclusion' for his units II and V, and his V and VI are in joint parallel with his IV, where we have the birth, circumcision and canticle for John set against the same for Jesus. 2 MLM, pp. 180 fF. 3 / Apol. 67. 4 These are marked in italic numbers in the margins of the more recent editions of Nestle. The uncials containing these divisions include ACOEZ: cf. MLM, pp. 180 ff.

sometimes irrational, divisions creep in.1 A's total of 84 readings nevertheless seems to me substantially correct, and agrees with my own computation by the 'rubrics'. 2 This would be natural once numbers were written into the margins; individual readings could be subdivided, but only by adjustment to fit the numbers later on. There is a reason for there being 84 lections to the Lucan year as against 69 to the Matthaean year, which I shall explain shortly. Alexandrinus has the numbers of the readings marked down the side margin, and the title of each reading at the top of the page, and a table of the readings at the front of the Gospel; but its testimony is subject to doubt in that the older uncials, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, do not contain the same divisions. We are fortunate, however, to have A's evidence substantially confirmed by the Bodmer papyrus, p75, which preserves more than half the Gospel in excellent condition, including, for the greater part, the margins.3 The text is copied with an even left margin which is broken from time to time with the edentation of a single letter, and these edentations correspond with the beginning of a new pericope, and are interpreted by Martin and Kasser, who edited the papyrus, as indications of lections. The letter is extruded in the line following the start of the new unit where this begins in the middle of a line; and in other places the break is marked with a line in the text, perhaps where the edenting has been forgotten. The reader would thus carry on until he could see his way barred by an edentation or mark in the next line. p7S has text to cover 40 places where the 'rubrics' indicate a break, and of these it has edentations or marks which agree with 31 exactly and with a further 5 nearly; but there are also 23 additional edentations and marks, all in the Journey section, often clearly secondary as in the case of the Woes in Luke 11, each of which is edented. p75 is a valuable confirmation of the lectionary thesis because it is so early: it was copied only a century to a century and a quarter after the autograph, 4 and shows clear evidence of lectionary use in the way the text was written. More than half its divisions correspond with the rubrical breaks. The tendency to subdivide is the same as with Alexandrinus, but the papyrus does not have in the margin the numbers which proved such a conservative force with the latter. 1

For example, unit 66 is the single verse Luke 19.12, while the remainder of the Pounds is unit 67. See the list in Table IE, pp. 103 f. 3 Papyrus Bodmer XIV, edd. V. Martin and R. Kasser (Cologny-Geneve 1961). There is a reproduction of the folio covering Luke 10.32—11.1 on the jacket of this book. 4 Martin and Kasser date the papyrus between 175 and 225; the earlier date seems to be favoured by most papyrologists. 2

If I were being rigorous, I would eschew two simplifications which I am going to make in the matter following. First, the correspondences which I am about to allege between Luke and the Old Testament are correspondences between a Greek Luke and a Greek LXX, so far as we are able to reconstruct those texts. It is, however, cumbrous to quote every passage in both Greek and English, so I shall ask the reader to trust me if I give the correspondences in English only; and in return I shall make a promise to use the same English word only when the Greek word is the same. Sometimes I shall need to cite the Greek, but usually I shall save the time. Secondly, I ought properly to refer to the opening passage in Luke, 1.5-25, as the first section, or reading. But if I do this I impose an intolerable strain on my reader's concentration; for my claim, which (I hope) he wishes to test, is that the opening passage corresponds with sidra 5.1 Not only is it difficult to remember that passage 1 in Luke is meant to correspond with sidra 5, but, as I shall explain, there are certain additional readings in Luke, so that a differential of 4 is not a constant. I shall therefore take the liberty of referring to the opening passage in Luke as Lection 5, thus assuming for the moment the soundness of my theory. The Abraham saga occupies sidrdt 3, 4, and 5, and is therefore nearly complete before Luke begins his tale. Sarah in fact dies and is buried in the opening chapter of the 5th sidra, which is called 'Sarah's Life', Hayye Sarah, from the opening words. The parallels between Abraham and Sarah and Zechariah and Elizabeth are in every commentary. Zechariah and Elizabeth 'walked in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord': Abraham kept 'my commandments and my ordinances' (1.6; Gen. 26.5). Elizabeth was barren: Sarah was barren (1.7; Gen. 11.30). Zechariah and his wife were 'advanced in their days': Abraham and his wife were 'advanced of days' (1.7; Gen. 18.11). The angel of the Lord appeared to Zechariah by the altar: God, in the form of three men, later called angels, appeared to Abraham by the oak (1.11; Gen. 18.1 ff.). The angel says to Zechariah, 'Your wife Elizabeth shall generate a son to you, and you shall call his name John': God says to Abraham, 'Behold, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac' (1.13; Gen. 17.19). Zechariah doubts the promise, 'How shall I know this?': Abraham doubts the promises, 'How shall I know that I shall inherit it?' (1.18; Gen. 15.8; cf. 17.17, 18.11 ff). The angel says of Elizabeth's conceiving, 'No word shall be impossible with God': the Lord says to Abraham, 'Shall any 1

The Lucan units, or lections as I am claiming, are set out in parallel with the sidrdt in Table III, pp. 103 f.

word be impossible with God?' (1.37; Gen. 18.14). These correspondences are in fact principally with sidrd 4, not sidrd 5, and the last of them occurs in Gabriel's word to Mary in Lection 6; but it is no part of my hypothesis to exclude references to near-by sidrdt. Given Luke's situation as I am supposing it, with a sidra covering the last days of Sarah and Abraham, and—which is often significant —bearing Sarah's name, we can easily understand him filling out the characters and history of Elizabeth and Zechariah from earlier episodes in the patriarchal saga. Indeed, he throws in that they were righteous before God, and that Mary found grace with God (1.6, 30): it was Noah who found grace before God, and who was a righteous man (Gen. 6.9 f.). Such phrases could well be carried over in the mind from week to week. Sidrd 6, 'The Descendants' (ysviaeu;), tells of the birth and rivalry of Jacob and Esau. The destiny of the two boys is set from the womb, and Rebecca went to inquire of the Lord because the children leaped in her belly. Now in the 6th Lection Mary visits the pregnant Elizabeth, and the babe leaps in her womb in recognition of its future Lord: Elizabeth goes on to say, 'The babe leaped in my womb for joy.' These are the only two occasions in the Bible of such an event; and the Lucan reading is indeed a story of yevfoeic. The Lection also contains a number of more general references to the patriarchs: 'He will reign over the house of Jacob for ever' (1.33), 'He has helped his servant Israel in remembrance of his mercy, as he spoke to Abraham and his posterity for ever' (1.54 f.). These would be not inapt in the first of the Jacob sidrdt. The foundation of the people of Israel rests in fact upon a series of marvellous conceptions of children: not only Sarah and Rebecca, but Rachel in sidrd 7 is barren until the action of God. The 7th sidra records the birth of all Jacob's children but Benjamin: each is born to his mother's delight, each is named, and a brief oracle is pronounced upon the destiny of each. So in Lection 7 is Elizabeth's child born amid joy and named, and the Benedictus pronounced over him. When Rachel conceived Joseph she said, 'God has taken away my reproach': and when Elizabeth conceived John she said, 'Thus the Lord looked on me, to take away my reproach among men' (1.25; Gen. 30.23). When Leah gave birth to her first-born, Reuben, she said, 'Because the Lord has seen my lowliness'; and at the birth of her last-born, Asher, she said, 'Blessed am I, for women shall call me blessed' (Gen. 29.32; 30.13): Mary says in the Magnificat, 'He has looked upon the lowliness of his handmaiden: for behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed' (1.48). The Benedictus opens by blessing the Lord God of Israel, and recalls the mercy

promised to our fathers, the holy covenant which he swore to Abraham. As God preserved Jacob from Laban and Esau, so are we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, to serve him without fear all the days of our life. In sidra 8 Jacob returns to his homeland. He wrestles with the angel at Penuel and names the place Face of God: 'for I have seen God face to face and my life was preserved'. He outwits Esau and comes with his sheep and oxen to Shechem: and after the incident there reaches Bethlehem, where his youngest child Benjamin is born. It is in Lection 8 that Jesus is born at Bethlehem. His parents are also on the road, going back to Joseph's home-city. The first witnesses of his coming are shepherds, and he is hailed at his Presentation by Anna the daughter of Phanuel of the tribe of Asher, and by Simeon. Holding Jesus in his arms, the old man says, 'Mine eyes have seen thy salvation'. Sidr& 9, Wayyeshebh, Korafricei 84, 'And he dwelt', tells of the boy Joseph, seventeen years of age, dwelling with his father and mother in the land of Canaan. It describes the dreams which presage his future destiny, and how 'his father kept the saying'; he is then sold into slavery, and lost to his father for a period. In the final section of Luke's infancy stories, Jesus lives with his father and mother in Nazareth. Aged twelve, he is left behind at Jerusalem, to their perplexity; 'and Mary kept all these sayings (AT) in her heart' (2.51; cf. 19; Gen. 37.11). As Easter is the third Sunday in the year, so does Pentecost fall in the tenth week of the year, and Pentecost Sunday is the tenth Sunday. Pentecost was to the Jews the Festival of the Law-giving; but Luke tells us in Acts the significance of the feast to his church. It was the giving of the Spirit rather than the Law, perhaps with conscious opposition. In the 10th Lection Luke describes the Baptist's preaching (3.1-20, a single theme opened with John's dated coming, and closed with his arrest). This reaches its climax with his witness to Christ: 'I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming . . . he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire' (3.16; Matt. 3.11). The earlier tradition could hardly have supplied a more apt text. The meaning of the fire to Matthew may be in doubt, but to the author of Acts 2 it stands without amendment for the tongued flame of inspiration. Nor is this theme absent from the Jewish tradition. In the 10th sidra Pharaoh said to his servants of Joseph, 'Can we find a man such as this, in whom is the Spirit of God?' (Gen. 41.39): a theme, as I hope to show, developed in Isaiah. In the 11th sidrd Joseph is revealed, Joseph whom his father loved

more than his other sons; Jacob and his family go down to Egypt, and a genealogical table of his descendants is given. In the 11th Lection (3.21-38, Jesus' Baptism), Luke records the descent of the Holy Spirit, with the apt Marcan words, 'Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased', and upon this peg he proceeds to hang his Genealogy of Jesus' ancestors. The name Joseph is to the fore, as if to emphasize the link with Joseph in Genesis. The Genealogy begins, 'being the son, as was supposed, of Joseph', and Jesus' seventh ancestor is another Joseph, and his 35th another; and in the Nazareth synagogue the crowd, amending the previous tradition, asks, 'Is not this Joseph's son?' Nor are the other patriarchs absent: four of them occur in a row in the fifth 'week'—Levi, Simeon, Judah, Joseph—and there is a further Levi and the biblical Judah as well, besides (if they are relevant) Semein, Josech, Joda. Sidra 12 completes the Joseph saga: Jacob blesses his children and dies. Earlier tradition had followed Jesus' Baptism with the Temptations, and Luke is content to take over the Q/Matthaean Temptations story nearly as it stands for his 12th Lection (4.1-13, a single theme with a new location, closed with the devil's departure).1 All the land of Egypt hungered and cried to Pharaoh for bread, and Jacob sent his sons to buy corn 'that we may live' (Gen. 41.55; 42.1). Jesus in Matthew had said that man shall not live by bread alone, and Luke leaves out the following, ' . . . but by every word . . . ' , which do not belong in the Genesis context. Matthew's third Temptation is promoted, and reworded to point the fulfilment of Genesis. 'To you', says the devil, 'will I give all this authority and the glory of them; for it has been delivered to me, and I give it to whom I will. If you, then, will worship me, all shall be yours.' Pharaoh had said to Joseph, 'Behold, I have set you over all the land of Egypt . . . Only in the throne will I be greater than you'. He had given him the symbols of vice-gerency, so that Joseph could say, 'Tell my father of all my glory in Egypt' (Gen. 41.40-3; 45.13). Before summing up what has emerged so far, it may be well to complete our survey of Genesis by working back from the end of the Gospel through the first four sidrdt. The Emmaus Road/Easter Evening story would fall, then, against sidra 4. Sidra 4 is called Wayyera\ <50r| 86, 'And he appeared', and opens with the theophany 1

As there were 54 sidrdt to go round a year of 50/51 sabbaths and the Day of Atonement, some combination would be required every year, and this was later done at the end of a book of the Torah, as might be convenient. In the year that I have set out in Table VIII I have taken the last two units of Exodus together, and Luke may have done this regularly, cf. p. 37, n. 1, p. 45, n. 4, p. 83.

to Abraham: it is the occasion when Abraham entertained angels unawares. God eats at his table in form of the three men, and then speaks the word of promise which his hearers find it hard to credit. In the following chapter, two angels come to summon Lot from Sodom. Lot invites them into his house, and when they show reluctance he constrains them (KaxePidaato, 19.3). There is more than a casual similarity in the Gospel. Jesus walks with Cleopas and his companion and they do not know him: he makes as if to go further and they constrain him (roxpePidoavio, 24.29). Returned, they hear that he has appeared to Simon. He eats with them and reveals his resurrection, and they scarcely believe for joy. Life from the dead and life from the dead womb of Sarah are expressly compared by Paul in Rom. 4. Sidra 3, then, would fall on Easter Day: it is a passage full of suggestiveness for Easter preaching—Abraham's faith, the old circumcision covenant and baptism, Christ our high priest of the order of Melchizedek: but Luke 24.1-12 shows no trace of it. Sidra 2, Noah, was, however, a clear invitation to compare the tribulation to come with the flood, and I have already suggested that Matthew did so.1 Christ prophesied wars, famines, persecution, celestial signs and his return: it is Luke who introduces into the tradition the flood motif—'on earth there shall be distress of nations in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves, men fainting with foreboding' (21.25 f.). It is no longer a fiery consummation only, but a new Flood as well. Sidra 1 has no Lucan parallel. It will not, I think, be denied that Luke has the Greek book of Genesis in mind as he writes Luke 1—3; and indeed consciously so. The question is whether, as is usually thought, Luke was content to paint a story of annunciations by angels, of barrenness relieved, and children marvellously born, in the colours of the LXX, which means Genesis in this case; or whether there is close enough correspondence with the Jewish serial readings to support the thesis which we are considering—and here the very multiplicity of references reduces the clarity of the picture. We must admit at once that Luke is not bound by the sidrdt: 1 and 3 are missing, 3 not surprisingly. On the other hand, a continuous series of correspondences with the lessons for weeks 4 to 12, nine in a row, is impressive, and I cannot escape the impression of the Lucan story moving forward in parallel with Genesis: Lection 2 with the Flood, Lection 4 with the appearances to Abraham and Lot, and Lot's constraining, Lection 5 with the conception of Isaac, Lection 6 with the leaping of the children in Rebecca's womb, Lection 7 with the birth and naming of 1

p. 49, above.

Jacob's sons, and the oracles, Lection 8 with Benjamin's birth at Bethlehem and the Penuel reference, Lection 9 with Jacob keeping the saying about his son, Lection 10 with the man in whom is the spirit of God, Lection 11 with the patriarchal Genealogy, Lection 12 with Joseph's authority and glory in the days of hunger. There is a coincidence of names and rare words and whole phrases between the two accounts which it would be rash to ascribe to accident. The 13th Lection, the Rejection at Nazareth (4.14-30, a single theme with an introduction and conclusion of a formal kind), brings us, then, to the beginning of the book of Exodus, and so suggests the answer to a long-standing puzzle: why has Luke promoted the Rejection from its much later context in Mark and Matthew?1 In Stephen's speech in Acts 7 (17-35) we have an insight into Luke's reading of Exod. 1—5, and into the considerable significance he ascribed to it; for he devotes to it nineteen verses, more than a third of the whole. Moses, mighty in words and deeds, defended an oppressed Israelite, supposing that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand; but they did not understand, they thrust him aside, they refused him; he spent forty years in Midian, and was sent in the wilderness by God to deliver his people; but the fathers continually refused to obey him, and resisted the Holy Spirit. So now, in the Gospel, Christ comes from his forty days in the wilderness to deliver Israel. Full of the Spirit, in the power of the Spirit, he proclaims his inspiration in a full citation of Isa. 61: since Isaiah is itself a prophecy of a new Exodus, the words are well suited to a new Moses, 'He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives . . . to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord'. But they will no more accept him than they accepted Moses of old. As Elijah fled the land to Zarephath, where he brought blessing to the heathen widow, as Elisha gave healing to Naaman, so does Jesus escape with 1

It is vain to explain the change of order by reference to Luke's special source, since we do not know the order of Luke's special source, or even that it included this passage; but the change can be in part explained as a gloss on Matt. 4.13 Kal KotTotXiiwbv rfiv NaCapd, by those who concede Lucan knowledge of Matthew. Most commentators, e.g. Schiirmann, adopt a symbolic explanation: Luke, as with a lens, concentrates the events of the whole mission —Jesus' spirit-filled proclamation of the Gospel, its rejection and his attempted murder—in a single programmatic first story. If so, it would appear to be rather a flash in the pan: does Luke change the order of the Marcan Call of the first Apostles, or the Call of the Twelve, or the Mother and Brethren, for symbolic reasons?

his life, and turn at last to the Gentiles. No prophet is acceptable in Israel. They have resisted the Holy Spirit from the days of Moses on. With the end of the Rejection story we reach a turning-point in Luke's Gospel. Hitherto we have had a series of non-Marcan stories: there have been parallels with Matthew, but the connections with Mark have been limited to a few words and phrases. From 4.31 to 6.19 there is a change of policy: Luke not only follows the Marcan wording of the stories much more closely, he also (with one or two exceptions) follows Mark's order. Concurrently with this change of policy comes a lapse of the close parallelism which we have hitherto remarked; for while we might allege a general similarity between God's mighty works in the Exodus and Jesus' mighty works of healing, there is clearly no close relationship between the two. Such a lapse would be no surprise for the hypothesis we are examining; for (to resume my image of the curd at Ars) no preacher feels that he must follow a course on the liturgical gospel unbroken round the year. Perhaps he will give a short series of sermons on the epistles, or some topical subject; or perhaps (at Ars) there is already fixed a tradition of events in order about the saint, and this cannot be interrupted without offence. So here: we know that Luke had a tradition of events in Jesus' life in order, because we have it in Mark. There are ten sidrdt remaining in Exodus, and there are, on a natural count, nine Marcan incidents in a row from 4.31 on: the Demoniac in the Synagogue, Simon's Wife's Mother with the Mission Tour, the Call of the First Apostles, the Leper, the Paralytic, the Call of Levi, the Cornfield, the Man with the Withered Hand, the Call of the Twelve. Every year either Genesis or Exodus had to be shortened by combining the last two sidrdt in one or other book: 1 if Exodus were read over the full ten weeks, Simon's Wife's Mother could be separated .from the Mission Tour, as they are separated in Alexandrinus. The riddle of the order of Luke's Gospel can be broken down into three main subsidiary questions: (1) Why does Luke break the Marcan sequence which he has followed from 4.31 to 6.19? He has included almost all the Marcan material up to Mark 3.19, and when he resumes taking Mark as his source, he will begin at the Motherand-Brothers and the Sower (Mark 3.31, Luke 8.4), having omitted the Beelzebul story. In the place of this single omission Luke has introduced six lessons: the Sermon on the Plain, the Centurion's Slave, the Widow's Son, the Baptist's Question (with Jesus' testimony to the Baptist), the Woman who was a Sinner, and the Ministering Women. (2) When Luke does resume following Mark, why does he continue his policy of faithful inclusion of each Marcan pericope 1

cf. pp. 37, 45, 80.

up to the Feeding of the Five Thousand (Mark 6.44, Luke 9.17), and then make the Great Omission? He leaves out the Baptist's death immediately before the Five Thousand, and then the Walking on the Water, the Controversy over Purity, the Syro-Phoenician Woman, the Deaf Stammerer, the Four Thousand (with pendant conversation in the boat), and the Blind Bethsaidan. (3) Having again taken Mark as his authority from Caesarea Philippi to the Strange Exorcist (Mark 8.27—9.40, Luke 9.18-50), why does he desert him for a protracted period (9.51—18.14), introducing a variety of material for a much extended version of Jesus' journey to Jerusalem? There has been no satisfactory answer to these three questions, and I should wish to claim that the lectionary theory provides one for the first time. There are some minor order-changes besides, on which I shall comment, but given Luke's understandable policy of making Mark his principal authority, these are the three major problems with which any exegesis must contend. On the lectionary hypothesis, as we have seen, Luke's church celebrated Passover with the Passion story, Easter with the Resurrection, and Pentecost with the Baptist's preaching of Christ's baptism with the Spirit. The Genesis readings provided him with texts through the months of Iyyar and Sivan, and there were Exodus and Marcan readings through Tammuz and Ab, and into Elul. I have set these out in Table III at the end of the chapter (pp. 103 f.), where the reader can see the relation between the festivals and the weekly readings—for sabbaths in the Synagogue, and (we must suppose) for Saturday nights in the Church (cf. Acts 20.7 If.). Now, however lightly Luke sat to his Jewish heritage, it is difficult to believe that his church would have discontinued the use of the old Biblical festivals; and he seems to hint his observance of Atonement at Acts 27.9, 'As much time had been lost, and the voyage was already dangerous because the fast had already gone by . . .' Winter was beginning, and the fast was Atonement. If this is so, the end of the Exodus sidrdt would be the sign of the approach of the festal season. Luke is already a week or two into Elul; the next month is Tishri, with first New Year, then Atonement and finally Tabernacles. New Year is to Judaism something like what Advent is to Christianity,1 that is, a season of sober joy, in which expectation of God's coming action is mingled with penitence at what such action will mean for the believer. In the Mishnah it is one of the four days on which judgement is decreed: 'On New Year's Day, all that come into the world pass before (God) like flocks of sheep'.2 Ultimately 1 3

cf. Moore, Judaism, ii, 63-5. R.H. 1.2.

God will establish his kingdom in the age to come at the final New Year, and this is anticipated in the Jewish New Year liturgy with the recital of ten sentences on God's kingship, ten on his remembering his people, and ten on the trumpets with which mankind will be summoned to judgement.1 One of the New Year readings was Isa. 35,2 which foretold this, and contained the happy prophecy, 'Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; then shall the lame man leap like a hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing for joy. . . .' (.5 f.). In my earlier book I argued that this text lay behind Matthew's lesson for New Year, 3 Matt. 11, and lent weight to Jesus' answer to John, 'The blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor evangelized.' Furthermore, the testimony of Jesus to the Baptist, which follows in Matt. 11.7-19, and Jesus' rebuke of the cities in .20-24, are both sermons on the failure of 'this generation' to repent. John came, the prophesied Elijah, and was murdered by men of violence; he came neither eating nor drinking, and they said 'He has a demon'; the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they slander him; woe to Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum, for Tyre and Sidon would have repented in dust and ashes at such works as Christ's; thank God for the babes of faith who have taken his yoke on them. Now, this same passage, only slightly amended, comes in Luke 7.18-35, but without the final section. John's question is answered as before with reference to Isa. 35.5 f . , ' The blind receive their sight, the lame walk . . .' There is the same challenge, 'What did you go out into the wilderness to behold?', and the same reproach to 'this generation'; they have repented neither at John's nor at Jesus' preaching. So Luke has the greater part of what I have claimed to be Matthew's New Year sermon; and he has it as the fourth reading following his Mark/Exodus sequence, after the Sermon on the Plain, the Centurion's Slave and the Widow's Son. That brings it to Lection 27, to fall at New Year. After New Year comes Atonement, on 10th Tishri, with its reading of Lev. 16, the Law of Atonement, and Lev. 18, forbidding sexual defilement. Now, it is especially in connection with the doctrine of the Atonement that all N.T. authors have something to add to Judaism; for God has set forth Christ Jesus as a means of forgiveness by his blood; 4 he entered once for all into the Holy Place, thus 1 2 3 4

Moore, Judaism, ii.64. See below, pp. 162-4. MLM, pp. 312, 353 f. Rom. 3.25.

securing an eternal redemption; 1 his blood of the covenant was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.2 To Luke, above all, the old rites are abolished in Christ, but to Luke, above all, the forgiveness of sins was a precious doctrine; and we should have expected to find in his gospel, were our theory correct, a suitable lesson on this topic following New Year. Luke 7.36-50 is in fact the story of the Woman who was a Sinner, and it is difficult to think of any paragraph in the Gospel more to the point. With her ointment, her tears and her kisses, she is the exemplar of penitence and devotion. The critical attitude of Jesus' Pharisee host draws from the Lord the parable of the Two Debtors, with its moral on forgiveness and gratitude. The conclusion is stated: 'Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little.' Jesus says to her, 'Your sins are forgiven', and those at the table murmur, 'Who is this, who even forgives sins?' Not only is the whole story designed to teach the lesson of forgiveness of sins, the theme of Yom Kippur, but the woman's particular sins are those of sex, the topic of Lev. 18. So we have an explanation on offer for the position of the pericope as the reading for Atonement in the Lucan church; and we can also understand how Luke has come to transfer and embellish the story of the woman with the alabaster jar of ointment in the house of Simon from Mark 14.3-9. Luke needed her for Atonement. After Atonement comes Tabernacles, the Jewish feast of Ingathering. In Matthew, the New Year discourse in Matt. 11 was succeeded by matter on the failure of the Pharisees to be forgiven and escape judgement, not repenting at the preaching of the greater than Jonah (Matt. 12); and then by the Parables discourse in Matt. 13. Both the forgiveness and the Jonah theme made the passage seem suitable for Atonement, in view of the reading of Jonah at the Fast; 3 and the Parables discourse seemed made for the Matthaean celebration of Ingathering. There were parables about the Sower, the Tares, and the Mustard Seed, all with harvest sermons appended; and it appeared plausible to subdivide the chapter into sections of similar length for each of the eight days of Tabernacles.4 If this is right, then we should expect something similar from Luke: in fact Luke 8.4-18 comprises the Sower, the Reason for Parables, the Interpretation of the Sower, and the appended sayings on the Lamp. Luke has transferred the Mother-and-Brothers pericope to follow 1 2 3 4

Heb. 9.12. Matt. 26.28. See Table I, p. 67, MLM, pp. 187 f. MLM, pp. 364 ff.

this complex, making its final sentence, 'My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it', a fitting sequel to the parable of those who hear the word and hold it fast (.15). We could scarcely have asked for a more striking confirmation of the lectionary thesis. Luke seems to have in 7.18—8.21 a sequence of three festal lessons: 'The blind receive their sight. . a n d the need of repentance for New Year, the Woman who was a Sinner for Atonement, and the Sower and other matter for Tabernacles. One difference from Matthew is, however, apparent in Luke: whereas Matthew seems to provide eight lessons for an eight-day Tabernacles, and additional passages for those years when extra Saturdays fell between the festivals, Luke has little to correspond with this. We may not find this very surprising, however. As the Church became increasingly Gentile, the hold of the Jewish Year naturally relaxed. We should not really have expected Lucan Christians to go eight days running to celebrate Sukkot; nor perhaps did they keep Jewish New Year if it fell on a weekday, since they had a secular New Year of their own. Luke's swift succession of Tishri festal readings appears to indicate what we should in any case have tended to believe: that Ro'sh Hashshanah became New Year Sunday, that Yom Kippur became Atonement Sunday, and that Tabernacles became Harvest Festival Sunday (to this day). There is the short additional paragraph about the Women in 8.1-3, which might have been used between Atonement and Tabernacles, or on either; and the Mother-and-Brothers could be detached, or repeated, for the Sunday after the Feast if need required. All in all, the shortened Lucan readings are in line with the Church's general tendency to shorten and simplify an increasingly irrelevant Jewish liturgical year. What about the three readings before New Year, the Sermon on the Plain, the Centurion's Slave, and the Widow's Son? The last is no problem. Before his New Year, Matthew has devoted two chapters to describing incidents in which the blind receive their sight, the dead are raised up, etc. (Matt. 8—9). Luke has not been so provident. As John's disciples arrive, he is reduced to saying, 'In that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many blind he bestowed sight' (7.21).1 He could hardly introduce the raising of the dead so casually, and accordingly we find the Widow's Son as the preceding lection.2 The story vividly recalls the restoration of the widow's son to life by Elijah in 3 Kms 17, except that there 1 2

cf. Creed, p. 106, Very awkwardly interpolated by Luke'. cf. Creed, p. 103, 'The insertion of the miracle at this point 0 prepares the way for the reply of Jesus to the messengers of John*.

it is a child raised, and in the widow's home, and here it is a young man, whose dead body is being carried out to burial. Now, the sidrd preceding the New Year, no. 26, is Lev. 9—11, and includes the death of the youthful Nadab and Abihu, and the carrying out of their corpses for burial (Lev. 10.1-5). We cannot help suspecting that the evangelist has derived his tale from prophecy in Scripture rather than from eyewitnesses. Tradition told him that Jesus had said, 'Dead are raised up', in the plural, but Mark and Matthew contain only Jairus' daughter. But Luke believed that no iota of the law could become void (16.17): here in the sidra was a tale of young men's death and carrying out, and Kingdoms provided a 'prophecy' of the end of the story. But not only must the dead have been raised by New Year; the poor must have been evangelized also; so Luke turns to Q/Matthew for good news to the poor (6.20-49). In Matt. 4.24 f. great crowds follow Jesus from many lands to be healed; in Matt. 5—7 he goes up the mountain and delivers the Sermon; in Matt. 8.1-13 he heals a leper and a centurion's boy. Having reached Mark 3.7 ff., Luke takes the call of the Twelve on the mountain (Mark 3.13-19) before the healing of the crowds from many lands (Mark 3.7-12). He is thus in a position to follow the same order as Matthew—healings, sermon, centurion's boy. The leper is omitted, having been already told in the Marcan order. This cannot be an accident: Luke is, as is widely agreed, following the 'Q' order. And has the Sermon any relation to the book of Leviticus? Here is not the place for an analysis of Luke's Sermon, but it leads up to and expounds the matter which we find also in Matt. 5.44-8: its theme is the love of our enemies, introduced by Matthew, 'It was said, "You shall love your neighbour, and hate your enemy" ' (5.43). Matthew's text is based on Lev. 19.18, and his climax 'You therefore shall be perfect. . .', and Luke's 'Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful', sound like echoes of Lev. 19.2, 'You shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy'. The central passages of Leviticus were pushed aside in Luke's church by the Tishri festivals for which he has supplied seasonal lessons. I should argue that he has introduced the Levitical season with a selection from Matthew's Sermon based on Jesus' 'fulfilment' of the great texts in Lev. 19. We have, then, an answer to our first question from the lectionary theory. Luke breaks the Marcan sequence at Mark 3.19 early in Elul because of the approach of the Tishri festivals. The healing of the crowds and Jesus' ascent of the mountain in Mark enable him to graft on the Sermon from 'Q', selecting those passages which teach the love of our enemies and derive ultimately from Lev. 19. The

centurion's boy was in the 'Q' source, and follows next; then, in preparation for New Year, the raising of the widow's son, drawing its inspiration from Lev. 10 and 3 Kms 17. Finally there are the three festal lessons: the traditional 'The blind receive their sight. . .' for New Year; the Sinner for Atonement; and the Sower for Tabernacles. One point will not have escaped the reader: Luke's form of the Tabernacles lesson comes not from 'Q' but from Mark again (Mark 3.31—4.25). It is necessary here to adumbrate what I shall set out more fully in ch. 9. It is not only Matthew and Luke who have John the Baptist, the call to repent, and the coming of God's kingdom as themes for New Year. Mark has them in his first chapter. Nor is it only Matthew and Luke who have suitable lessons about the forgiveness of sins at Atonement. Mark has the forgiveness of the Paralytic's sins, and the teaching on fasting to follow, in ch. 2. And Mark has the coming of the nations to the mountain of revelation in ch. 3, and the harvest sermons in ch. 4, combined as lessons for an eight-day Tabernacles. Mark is also a lectionary Gospel, but starting at New Year. He has Levitical lessons like the Leper (1.40-5, Lev. 14), and the teaching on blasphemy (3.20-30, Lev. 24), and in Mark 5 ff. he has a succession of stories, some of them taking up the Numbers sidrdt and others the Elijah-Elisha stories from the prophetic lessons. He then has readings for the eight days of Dedication. It is this background which explains the appearance of certain Numbers themes in the following chapter of Luke, and also the Great Omission. Sidra 35, Num. 4.21—7.89, directs in its first law (5.1 ff.) that those with sexual flux or contact with the dead should be put outside the camp. The 35th Lection in Luke is 8.40-8, the Woman with the flux of blood ( = Mark 5.21-34): the Numbers text would invite a Christian preacher to contrast the weakness of the old dispensation with the power of faith unto salvation in the new. Sidra 36, Num. 8—12, again treats of uncleanness incurred by touching the dead (9.6 ff.), and so would link with Luke's 36th Lection, 8.49-56, Jairus' daughter ( = Mark 5.35-43). Moses taught that a man who touched a dead body must wait a month to celebrate the Passover: Jesus took the dead girl by the hand, and her spirit returned. In sidra 37, 'Send you', Num. 13—15, Moses sends twelve men before him into the land; one of the twelve, Ause, he surnames Jesus. In Luke 9.1-9, Lection 37, Jesus calls the Twelve together, and sends them out to preach and to heal ( = Mark 6.7-13). All Israel's spies had been faithless but the newly surnamed Jesus, and Caleb; but Jesus the Christ, who surnamed some of his twelve apostles, found more faithful men, whose preaching has carried the gospel to the world. The Five Thousand, Luke's 38th Lection,

9.10-17, draws not on Numbers but on Elijah, unless there is a glance back to Num. 11. Thereafter comes the Great Omission. Luke did not provide for an eight-day Tabernacles, nor does he provide for an eight-day Dedication; indeed, it is questionable whether he celebrated a Temple-oriented, non-biblical feast at all. The Transfiguration falls opposite to Kislev IV in Table III, and would provide quite a suitable lesson. Dedication celebrates the descent of the glory-cloud on the Tabernacle and Temple, and the Transfiguration describes the glory-cloud which overshadowed Jesus.1 But Mark's eight Dedication lessons are seven too many, and Luke is compelled to omit the seven pericopae which I have already mentioned. So our theory provides a neat solution to the second problem of Luke's order; we must now turn to the third, the Long Journey. Hitherto, on our hypothesis, Luke has covered four books of Torah, and he has drawn twice apiece on his source-documents. In rough terms he has rewritten Matt. 1—4.11 for his Genesis; he has transcribed Mark 1.21—3.19 for his Exodus; he has quarried Matthew for his Leviticus; and transcribed Mark 4—9, with some considerable omissions, for Tabernacles and Numbers. It is clear, however, that a difficulty now faces us, for there is a major imbalance in what remains. We have covered over nine months of the year, but only thirteen chapters of the Gospel—Luke 21—24 in Nisan, four chapters, and 1—9.50 in the eight months following. We have taken more than three-quarters of the year to read rather over half the book; there remain eleven chapters of Luke to be taken in the eleven weeks over which the book of Deuteronomy was read—a chapter a week, over three times the amount of material provided per lection heretofore. An examination of the rubrical formulae suggests the same imbalance. There are more than thirty places where by the rubric we should expect a new lection to begin between 9.51 and 20.47. The correspondence of the Lucan Journey with the book of Deuteronomy was expounded in an article by Prof. C. F. Evans in 1954.2 Two criticisms can be made of Evans's article: (i) perhaps for the sake of completeness, he includes a number of parallels that are verbal rather than substantial; and (ii) he suggests no motive for 1 2

The Transfiguration is part of the Dedication liturgy in both Mark and Matthew. 'Deuteronomy and the Central Section of Luke', in D. E. Nineham (ed.), Studies in the Gospels (Oxford 1954); cf. J. Bligh, The Christian Deuteronomy (Langley 1970).

so quixotic a procedure as to write a section of the Gospel in parallel with Deuteronomy. The motive we are in a position to supply: Luke was providing a year's readings for a Greek church which was loosening its Jewish roots but retaining its Jewish Bible. The verbal parallels we are in a position to neglect. But the existence of a series of correspondences with Deuteronomy in order was, I believe, established by Evans; and it is this which suggests an answer to the problem of imbalance. Baptism in the Church was probably from the first century at Easter. Jewish proselytes were immersed before Passover.1 The association of baptism with Easter, or with the fifty days following Easter,2 is universal in the early patristic period. In Matthew, Jesus gives the charge to baptize (28.19) after the Resurrection, in a passage read each year on Easter Day. 3 The Church's exposition of baptism4 was in terms of the Red Sea, of Adam, 5 Noah, 6 and Abraham, 7 whose stories were read around Easter. Over time the habit was evolved of a period of instruction before Easter—instanced in the Didache and described by Hippolytus,8 even if we do not accept the claims of first-century evidence;9 the first surviving instance we possess of such an instruction is the Catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem, given about A.D. 348,10 of which eighteen were delivered in the six weeks' period before Holy Week. Now, the habit of giving an annual 1

b Pes. 91b-92a; j Pes. viii.8. The first evidence is Hippolytus, Ap. Trad. 20-1, which assumes Easter. Tertullian, de Bapt. 19, says that the Pasch provides the day of greatest solemnity for baptism; after that the fifty days of Pentecost; after that any day (perhaps in cases of urgency). The first Eastern witnesses are Cyril, Chrysostom, and Egeria, all of whom assume Easter. 3 MLM, pp. 192, 449. 4 J. Dantelou, The Bible and the Liturgy (1956, E.T. London 1960). 5 From Rom. 5.15—6.11 on. * Baptism is openly related to Noah in 1 Pet. 3.18 ff., but the Noah story is already in a Paschal context in Matt. 24.37 ff., cf. p. 49. 7 Abraham's faith is reckoned to him for righteousness in Rom. 4, and the same is reckoned to us who have faith in Christ: the whole complex faith-righteousness-grace-baptism-Spirit is linked through the middle chapters of the epistle. • Ap. Trad. 16-18: for the Didache, see pp. 276 f. 9 P. Carrington, The Primitive Christian Catechism (Cambridge 1940), and E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London 1946) described a common catechism behind the paraenetic sections of the N.T. epistles; this is contested by B. Rigaux, 'Tradition et Redaction dans 1 Thess. v.1-10', NTS 21.3 (1975), 335 f. 10 The date is given by F. L. Cross, St Cyril of Jerusalem's Lectures on the Christian Sacraments (London 1951), p. xxii; Cross was sceptical of the claim of W. J. Swaans, 'A propos des "Cat6ch£ses mystagogiques" attributes k S. Cyrille de Jerusalem', Le Musion 55 (1942), 1-43, that their true author was Cyril's successor, John. 2

short course of instruction before Baptism/Confirmation is one which has endured to the present day, and it is very hard to see how any church baptizing or confirming adults can dispense with it. It is only that the patristic Church gave its course of catechesis at the rate of three lectures per week where we are content with one. Nor is the pattern of thrice-weekly instruction of the devout a Christian invention: pious Jews went to synagogue three times a week, Saturday evening, Monday, and Thursday, to hear the sidra of the coming sabbath, 1 and none is so pious as the convert. So the way is open for us to suppose that baptism took place in the Lucan church also at Easter, and that the Lucan catechumens were also prepared with three lessons a week. The Lucan Journey narrative is full of catechetical matter. It begins with three aspiring disciples being warned that the Son of Man has not where to lay his head, and that he who puts his hand to the plough must not look back. It expounds the great Deuteronomic Law, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God . . . ' , and matters such as repentance and faith and detachment from money. Catechumens would need to register by Dedication, and by Easter they would have an adequate knowledge of Christian morals and the Passion story. They would hear in three short weekday sections what the whole church would have as its Gospel the following Sunday. The full narrative of the institution of the Eucharist, and the Lord's death and resurrection would be reserved till Passover/Easter. For the remainder they would have to attend the full cycle. Such a reconstruction is not a speculation: Luke tells us that it is so, for does he not promise Theophilus that he is now to know the full truth of the things in which he has been catechized (itepl <&v KornixflBris Wyoav)?2 Theophilus has served his three-month catechumenate and been baptized: here now, the Easter octave over, is the full story from beginning to end. Christianity took over from Judaism the idea of a Passover initiation, 3 and before Passovertide in Judaism the lessons were from Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy is by its nature, and perhaps even by 1 2

3

m Meg. 3.6, 4.1. Paul's churches had an officer called 6 KaxrixdSv, and he told 6 Komixofyievos to share all good things with him (Gal. 6.6), i.e. contribute in kind to his income. Hence the word has a technical meaning from the 50s, and Luke is familiar with this, for he says that Apollos had been K<XTT|XT|H6VOS in the way of the Lord (Acts 18.25). It is true that Koerr|x6Tv can mean more generally 'to inform', but cf. p. 2, n. 3. There is a full and critical discussion in G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Exeter 1962), pp. 18-31; but it is difficult to account for the universality of Paschal baptism unless it is very primitive, or for its being very primitive unless it was taken over from Judaism. Exod. 12.48 associates circumcision with taking the Passover, and so does Josh. 5; the schools of

its design, a catechetical book. It is throughout a work of recapitulation. It tells the listener what the community did: 'At that time I said . . . ' (1.9) 'And we set o u t . . . ' (.19) 'Yet ye would not go up' (.26). It tells him the laws which God gave to the community: the Commandments, the Book of the Covenant, the H-code, are all here again in their Deuteronomic dress. The book is constantly concerned with 'your children', 'your little ones', 'those that come after': 'make them known to your children and your children's children' (4.9); 'that you may fear the Lord your God, you and your son and your son's son' (6.2); 'nor is it with you only that I make this sworn covenant, but with him who is not here with us this day' (29.14 f.). There is an eye also on the proselyte: 'You stand this day . . . all the men of Israel, your little ones, your wives, and the sojourner who is in your camp' (29.10 f.). The family is a strong force in Jewish life, no doubt, but the teaching is actually achieved in the first place by the reading of the text in the synagogue, or earlier by its proclamation at meetings for worship 'today'. 1 In the last eleven weeks of the year, by our period, the community reinforces its conviction of its calling by the rehearsal of Deuteronomy; and the new sons of the commandments, and the new members who will eat Passover for the first time in Nisan, are assimilated as it is read. Deuteronomy sets before the listener a parting of the ways: 'Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse: the blessing, if you obey . . . and the curse, if you do not obey' (11.26 ff.). After the laws are given, the blessing and the curse are set out at leisure (27—28), and the final chapters constantly urge this bifurcation. 'See, I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil, in that I command you this day to love the Lord your God, to walk in his ways . . . that the Lord your God may bless you in the land whither you go in to possess i t . . . I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse' (30.15-19). The Deuteronomist compares the life of obedience to a road or way (derekh, 686;): 'I know that after my death you will . . . turn aside from the way which I have commanded' (31.29); and this image is natural in a work which sets itself in imagination at the beginning of Israel's journey into the land (1.6 ff). So it is hardly surprising if the rabbis use the same picture Hillel and Shammai debated how long before Passover a proselyte must have received the baptismal bath (b Pes. 91b-92a), and proselyte soldiers (before A.D. 70) received the bath and ate Passover the same day (j Pes. viii.8). 1 cf. H.-J. Kraus, Wl, p. 142, 'What is remarkable is the cultic actuality of 'today' that runs through the whole of Deuteronomy and shows the connection that the traditions have with worship.'

of the holy life as halakhah, or if Matthew draws together his Sermon under the challenge to enter on the narrow way that leads to life, and to forsake the broad way that leads to destruction. The Church took over Deuteronomy as the basis for its catechesis. The Didache, whose first six chapters are the elements of a secondcentury Syrian catechesis, builds the teaching of the catechumens on this structure. 'There are two ways, one of life and one of death' (Did. 1.1). The way of life is loving God as in Deut. 6, expounded by the Matthaean and Lucan sermons, the Commandments of Deut. 5, and other matter: 'The way of life is this. First of all thou shalt love the God that made thee . . . And this is the second commandment of the teaching. Thou shalt do no murder, thou shalt not commit adultery . . . ' (Did. 1,2). The Two Ways, as a catechetical structure, recur in the Epistle of Barnabas, 18.1, in Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 3.12.85), and the Clementine Homilies (7.3, 7). The widespread use of this catechetical form in the more Jewish churches is plainly related to the Jewish teaching of the Two Ways,1 which is found (significantly) in the Sifre, on Deut. 11.26. But there never was a Jewish catechism. Not only is there no trace of it in all rabbinic literature, but Judaism has no catechesis to this day, and its introduction is resisted by Jewish conservatives on the ground that there is no tradition for it.2 How, then, are we to explain the total disappearance of such a custom, especially when proselytes were very numerous in the first centuries B.C. and A.D.? Aseneth is admitted to membership of the people of God in Joseph and Aseneth without mention of a catechism. The postulated lost document is superfluous, for a surviving document setting forth the Two Ways is before us in Deuteronomy itself. The Jewish proselyte was circumcised and baptized in time to eat Passover in Nisan. 3 Jesus went up 1

2

3

"The choice is left to man; but lest Israel should say, Inasmuch as God has set before us two ways, we may go in whichever we please, the Scripture adds, "Choose life, that thou mayest live, and thy posterity". In the sequel is a comparison of the two ways, one of which is at the outset a thicket of thorns but after a little distance emerges into an open plain, while the other is at first a plain, but presently runs out into thorns. So it is with the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked': Moore, Judaism, i, 454, citing Sifre Deut. 53; cf. also the Qumran Community Rule III-IV. Encyclopaedia Judaica, art. 'Catechism'. The existence of a Jewish 'little manual' (Moore, Judaism, i, 188) was widely assumed by earlier scholars because of the tradition common to Sifre Deut. 53 and the Didache, etc.; but it is enough that both knew, and were expounding, Deuteronomy. Dr D. Daube has reconstructed an imaginary Jewish catechism from the Midrash on Ruth and other material in The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (London 1956), pp. 106-40. See p. 92, n. 3, above.

to Passover as a bar-mitsvah in his thirteenth year. Proselyte and bar-mitsvah alike have been drawn into the covenanting community over the weeks of hearing Deuteronomy read: they have chosen the way of life, and join in celebrating Israel's redemption. The traditions for the reception of proselytes into Judaism are set out in the Talmud. 1 Nobody is expected to come overnight to proselytism, but whether they have or no, a catechism in the sense of a course of instruction is ruled out. The intending proselyte is challenged, 'What reason have you for desiring to become a proselyte; do you not know that Israel at the present time are persecuted and oppressed, despised, harassed, and overcome by afflictions?' If he replies, 'I know and yet am unworthy', he is accepted forthwith, given a sample of the commandments—the sin of Gleanings, the Forgotten Sheaf, the Corner, and the Poor Man's Tithe are specified —and their rewards and punishments; and if he accepts, he is circumcised at once. As soon as he is healed, he receives the ablution or baptism immediately, with a second brief selection of the Law read out. A woman is introduced to the essence of religion in a single session through a screen, sitting in cold water up to her neck. From Luke 9.51 Jesus sets out on the journey that will take him beyond Jordan via Jericho to Jerusalem, like Israel's journey in Deuteronomy. The opening sidra, 44, Deut. 1—3.22, begins, 'These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel beyond the Jordan'. It recalls Moses' appointment of officers and judges on leaving Mount Horeb, wise men and understanding and prudent—seventy in number by the parallel account in Num. 11. He had sent a series of embassies into Transjordan, where he and the people were to follow. The embassies returned with their tidings of refusal. He recalls the hard times in the desert (later specified as 'the biting serpent and scorpion', 8.15) and the distribution of the land of Sihon and Og. The three corresponding Lucan readings, by introductory formula, will be: 9.51-end,2 Jesus' Journey and the three aspiring disciples, 10.1-16, the Mission Charge of the Seventy, and 10.17-24,3 1

b Yeb. 47ab. 9.51-end is often printed as two paragraphs, e.g. by Huck, The Samaritan Villages, and Claimants to Discipleship. However, the first ends, 'And they went on to another village', and the second begins, 'And (AT) as they were going . . . ' ; and it is hard to justify a full stop even. The same theme runs through the twelve verses: Jesus was refused lodging, the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head, this is what disciples must expect. P" has the section as a single paragraph. 3 10.17, 'The seventy returned with joy, saying...' marks a new departure, with a foil for Jesus' comments following. 10.21, 'In that same hour he rejoiced . . . '

2

his Thanksgiving at their Return. At 9.52 he sends messengers before his face in Samaria, and is refused; he then uses the refusal as a challenge to the aspirants, very much in the spirit of, 'Do you not know that Israel at the present time are oppressed and persecuted . . . ? ' At 10.1 he appoints Seventy, and sends them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself was about to come; those that do not receive them are rejecting him, and God. At 10.21 Jesus rejoices that his Father has hidden these things from the wise and understanding, and revealed them to babes; they have power to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and higher blessings too. Sidra 45, Deut. 3.23—7.11, 'And I besought', introduces the catechumen to the 'major' commandments, the Ten Words in Deut. 5; and to the 'Hear, O Israel', in Deut. 6, the basis of a Jew's devotional life. The latter is enclosed in a blanket of exhortation and promise: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one Lord, and thou shalt love the Lord thy God from all thy heart and from all thy soul and from all thy power . . . Thou shalt not tempt (fiinteipdaeis) the Lord thy God . . . Thou shalt do that which is good and pleasing before the Lord thy God, that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest go in and inherit the good land . . . that it may be well with us for all days, and that we may live, as even today' (Deut. 6.4 f., 16, 18, 24). The three succeeding Lucan pericopae are: 10.25-37, the Tempting Lawyer (answered by the Good Samaritan); 10.38-42, Martha and Mary; and 11.1-13,1 On Prayer. The parallels are obvious: the lawyer stands up tempting (fiKjietpdCcov) Jesus, asking what he shall do to inherit eternal life. What is written in the Law? 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God from all thy heart and from all thy soul and from all thy strength' (AT). 'You have answered right: do this and you will live'. Loving our neighbour (Lev. 19) is then expounded with the Samaritan parable, but in the following scene we are shown Mary's devotion to 'the Lord' (10.39, 40, 41), hearing his word and choosing the good part: so did Moses command, 'Hear, O Israel', as he delivered to them the Words of the Lord. But devotion to the Lord means in practice praying, and sidra 45, 'And I besought', is the text for an instruction

1

joins the second section on to the first: the seventy, to Luke, are the 'babes' to whom 'these things' have been revealed. 11.1-13 is a unity both by virtue of its prayer theme (the Lord's Prayer, the Friend at Midnight, 'Ask, and it will be given you ...'), and by its 'rubric'. 11.1 opens with an 'Andit came to pass . . . ' , with a setting of Jesus at prayer, and a foil introduction, 'Lord, teach us to pray . . . ' . 11.5 has the continuative, 'And he said to them . . . ' ; there is not even this at 11.9.

on prayer. We are to pray for the hallowing (Deut. 5.12) of the Lord's name (5.11), and for deliverance from temptation (6.16). So the Shema' is replaced by a more Christian form of devotion, the Lord's Prayer. Sidra 46, Deut. 7.12—11.25, has for its opening line, 'And it shall come to pass, when you shall have heard these ordinances, and shall have kept and done them, that the Lord w i l l . . . love thee and bless thee . . . the offspring of thy womb and the fruit of thy ground'; he will bring Israel into the land (7.12—9.5), to dispossess by military force nations great and stronger than themselves (9.1). Moses recalls the disobedience of Horeb, when he received the tables written with God's finger (9.10), and the series of rebellions that was to last through the desert (9.6—10.11); and closes with the appeal, 'And now, Israel, what does the Lord thy God require of thee but to fear the L o r d . . . who executes judgement... and loves the stranger?' (10.12-18 ff.). The three paragraphs following in Luke are: 11.14-28, The Beelzebul Healing;1 11.29-36, Jonah and Light;2 and 11.37-end, the Woes on Pharisees and Lawyers.3 All three are controversy passages in which the Pharisees appear as the descendants of stiffnecked Israel of old, consenting to the works of their fathers (11.48). Jesus casts out a demon by the finger of God (11.20), as the stronger man who comes and dispossesses the armed king, Satan (11.22); and they reject him. A woman from the crowd cries out, 'Blessed is the womb that bore you', but Jesus replies that those rather are blessed who hear the word of God and keep it (11.27 f.)—echoing the title sentence of the sidra. This the Pharisees do not do: they pass over judgement and the love of God (11.42). In sidra 47, Deut. 11.26—16.17, Moses sets before Israel the blessing and the curse; the curse 'if you wander from the way which ' T h e Beelzebul controversy is usually printed as a paragraph, 11.14-23, but Jesus' speech goes on about the return of the evil spirit, without intermission, 11.24-6, and the topic is the same. The two verses 27 f., 'The Blessedness of Christ's Mother' belong in the same context from the phrase, 'a woman in the crowd': the Pharisees do not (really) hear God's word, and do not keep it. 2 11.29 provides an introduction to a new section, 'When the crowds were increasing, he began to say .. .*, and continues without intermission at 11.33, where 'About Light' begins. The unity of thought lies in the preaching being seen as light (cf. 1.78 f., 2.32): a greater than Jonah has come, and we must not put his lamp in the cellar. 3 11.37 gives a new scene, 'While he was speaking, a Pharisee asked him to dine with him; so he went in and sat at table . . . ' , in which the Woes on both Pharisees and lawyers are spoken; so it seems best to regard 11.43, 'One of the lawyers answered him . . . ' as a secondary continuative introduction. The passage has one theme.

I commanded you, going to serve other gods' (11.26-8). In Deut. 12 Israel is bidden utterly to destroy all the places in which the nations served their gods, and to worship in Jerusalem only; in Deut. 13 the false prophet or relative who leads the people into apostasy is to be put to death, and any city reverting to heathendom is to be burnt—'You shall follow the Lord your God, and you shall fear him' (TOOTOV <|>oPTiefiareoee, 13.4). The matter is symbolized at the end of the reading, 'You shall eat no leaven' (16.3 If.). The high road to apostasy was prosperity in which God was forgotten (cf. 8.11-14), and the remedy proposed was its celebration in Jerusalem—'If the Lord thy God shall enlarge thy b o r d e r s . . . and thou shalt say, I will eat flesh; if thy soul desire to eat flesh, thou shalt e a t . . . before the Lord, rejoicing" (12.20). So would Israel prosper happily, and eat all the tithes of their fruits after three years (14.28); giving alms, releasing debts, and caring for slaves (15). The next Lucan passages are: 12.1-12, Fearless Confession; 12.13-40, Detachment from Wealth; 1 12.41—13.9, Faithfulness and Repentance.2 All three take up the apostasy-prosperity themes of the sidra. Jesus says to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy (12.3): his disciples are not to deny him under threat of martyrdom, or to fear their persecutors, but to fear God, 'yes, I tell you, fear him' (TOOTOV opf|6TiTE, 12.5). Detachment from wealth is taught first by the parable of the Rich Fool whose ground brought forth plentifully, and who said to his soul, Soul . . . take thine ease, eat, drink, rejoice (12.19). Detachment is practised by giving alms, making ourselves purses that wax not old (12.33). Jesus' coming brings division in families, father against son, son against father, those who believe against those who do not (12.49 ff.); we are to be faithful and repent, getting quittance of our creditor lest the eternal Judge condemn us (12.58 f.). 1

12.13-40 is a long lesson, but it is united by its theme, detachment from wealth, and by form. 'One of the multitude said to him, Teacher, bid my brother divide the inheritance with m e . . . ' provides the setting, with a foil introduction, to which Jesus replies with the Rich Fool parable, leading on, with 'And he said to his disciples', to the ravens and lilies (also about gathering and barns, eating and drinking, and laying up treasure for one's soul). The further paragraph, 12.35-40, 'Let your loins be girded . . . ' continues without a break: the Fool was not ready for his soul's being required of him; we must do better. 2 Peter's foil question, 'Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all?', introduces a new unit, again a long one running down to 13.9. There is no formal break at 12.49, which runs straight on, 'I came to cast fire on the earth'. There is a weak second introduction at 12.54, 'He also said to the multitudes'; and a third one at 13.1, 'There were some present at that very time who told him of the Galilaeans ...'—'at that very time' should indicate the same unit, as at 10.21. The same theme of readiness for the Son of Man's coming governs the whole pericope; Christians must be found faithful, non-Christians must repent—the parable is 'for all'.

Unless we repent we shall perish like those who sacrificed in Galilee (13.1 ff.), cut down like a fig tree that has been three years unfruitful (13.6 ff.). With sidra 48, Deut. 16.18—21.9, we reach an assortment of laws, many of them the laws which Manasseh broke (16.21—18.14), and provoked Israel's rejection and exile. Among them, kings are not to lift up their hearts, but to be humble (17.14-20); priests and Levites have no land, and are to be fed by the remainder of Israel (18.1-8); and it is provided that those who have a new house, a new vineyard or a new wife need not go to battle (20.1-9). The last is clearly taken up in the course of the three Lucan paragraphs following, 13.10-21, the Bent Woman, 1 13.22-end, the Rejection of Israel,2 14.1-24, the Pharisee's Dinner: 3 for it is in Luke's version of the Dinner parable that the excuses are the acquiring of a new farm, new oxen, and a new wife (14.18-20). More generally, Israel has rejected the Gospel, claiming to eat in the Lord's presence (13.26, cf. Deut. 16.1-18), while working iniquity (13.27), criticizing Jesus' sabbath healings, and stoning the prophets (13.34). They should not exalt themselves but be humble (14.7-11), and invite to dinner those who are in need (14.12-14). The final collection of laws is in sidra 49, Deut. 21.10—25.19, 'When you go forth to battle . . . ' , a number of which are to our purpose. If a man has two wives, one beloved and the other hated, he is to give the firstborn from the hated wife his double portion in the day when he causes his sons to inherit (21.15-17). If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son, a riotous liver and a drunkard, he is to bring him to be stoned (21.18-21). When you see your brother's calf or his sheep wandering in the way, you shall not overlook it, but shall restore it when he seeks after it (22.1-4). There are laws about building parapets (22.8), about the fair treatment of hated 1

The Bent Woman, 13.10-17, has two parables annexed to it, the Mustard Seed with 'He said therefore . . . ' , the Leaven with 'And again he said . . . ' . The 'therefore' makes the connection: official Judaism rejects Jesus, and is rejected, so the common people (.17) and ultimately the nations, represented by the birds, will nest in the kingdom's branches (cf. 13.28-30). 2 13.22 provides a new formal introduction, 'He went on his way through towns and villages, teaching, and journeying toward Jerusalem . . . ' , and there is a secondary introduction at 13.31, linked to the first by 'At that very hour . . . ' . Few will enter the kingdom, says Jesus; most will be cast out and replaced by Gentiles (.22-30); Herod wishes to kill me, and Jerusalem will do the deed (.31-35). 3 The whole of 14.1-24 takes place at the Pharisee's dinner, despite secondary introductions at 14.7,12,15. There is a common theme of the replacement of the Pharisees by the poor, the maimed, the blind, and the lame at God's feast.

wives (22.13 f.), about purity when going forth against your enemies (23.9 ff.), and not lending upon usury, so that God may bless you (23.19). The correspondence is striking with the following Lucan paragraphs: 14.25-end, Counting the Cost,1 15, the Lost Sheep, Coin and Son,2 and 16.1-13, the Unjust Steward. Christians must be prepared to hate (R) their parents, wife, and children (14.26); counting the cost like a tower-builder (14.28 ff.), or a king going out to war (14.31 f.—cf. also Deut. 20.10 ff, offering terms of peace). Jesus with the sinners is like a shepherd seeking a lost sheep (15.1-7); God is like a father of a younger son who asked for his share of the inheritance and wasted it in dissolute living with harlots, and was received back with joy (15.11-32). Disciples are to be like the steward who remitted the unrighteous mammon, and won friends with the angels in heaven (16.9). Sidra 50, Deut. 26—29.9, sums up the foregoing laws with a succession of blessings and curses. Israel is to bring its first fruits and tithes, and to feed the stranger and the fatherless within his gates (26.1-15). He is to hearken diligently to God's commandments and do them, and he will be blessed (28.1 ff.): otherwise he will be cursed. The Lucan pericopae are: 16.14—17.4, the Care of Little Ones (like Lazarus);3 17.5-10, the Servant of all Work; and 17.11-19, the Ten Lepers. In the first a contrast is drawn between the comforting of Lazarus and the tormenting of Dives for his neglect of the poor man at his gate (16.19 ff.). The divorce law from the previous sidra (Deut. 24.1 ff.) is declared abrogated (16.16-18)—the idea of carryover mars the neatness of the parallels which have hitherto been an impressive feature, but we saw something similar in the Genesis section.4 The Servant of all Work may similarly owe something to the law of paying a hired servant in Deut. 24.14 ff, and the Lepers to the law of taking leprosy to the priests (17.14, cf. Deut. 24.8 f.); 1

14.25, 'Now great multitudes accompanied him; and he turned and said to them", provides a formal introduction to the paragraph, which runs on unbroken to the end of the chapter. The salt sayings in .34 f. are therefore to be interpreted of the same theme of counting the cost of faith. 2 15.1-2 gives the three parables a single formal setting, and the flow is broken by only, 'And he said', at 15.11. The united theme is repentance. 3 This is the hardest pericope to discriminate, because the thread of thought is not obvious. There is a formal setting at 16.14, and no break at 16.16, 18, 19, and only the brief 'And he said to his disciples' at 17.1. The Pharisees' love of money and condemnation by God in 16.14 f. is plainly continued in Dives and Lazarus, with a short excursus in .16-18; 17.1—4 is linked on to the parable by the phrase 'one of these little ones' at 17.2. The link of thought is that the wealthy Pharisees, like Dives, make the poor, like Lazarus, to stumble, and they would be better drowned at sea than sent to hell. « See p. 78.

though I shall suggest later that such influences are secondary.1 In sidra 51, Deut. 29.10—30.20. 'You stand all of you today before the Lord', Moses continues to threaten wrath and to urge repentance. If the people persevere in stubbornness, the Lord will make the whole land brimstone and salt, like the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah (29.18-23): when they return to the Lord, he will gather them from the uttermost parts of heaven, purge their heart and bless them (30). The Lucan paragraphs are the last three non-Marcan ones in the Journey: 17.20-end, the Coming of the Son of Man; 2 18.1-8, the Unjust Judge; and 18.9-14, the Pharisee and Publican. Jesus' coming will be sudden like the lightning, as in the days of Noah, and of Lot(R), when it rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and destroyed them all (17.28 ff.); like an eagle descending on a corpse (cf. Deut. 28.49, 'from afar, like the swift flying of an eagle'). Like the judge, God will speedily avenge his elect, who cry to him faithfully (cf. the judging of widows, Deut. 24.17, and the £K81KTI<TI<; of Deut. 32.35, 43). The Pharisee may stand smugly praying, but God justifies the publican who stands afar off, and smites his breast: we must stand before the Lord in penitence. For the last three sidrot, Luke has the Judaean ministry stories from Mark. In sidra 52, Deut. 31, Moses commands Joshua to lead the new generation of the people across Jordan, and to inherit the land (31.2 ff.). The three Marcan pericopae are all somewhat to the point. Only those who become as children will enter the kingdom (Luke 18.15-17); how hard it is for the wealthy to enter the kingdom (18.18-34); Jesus goes over the Jordan to Jericho, where the blind man is healed (18.35-end). Sidra 53, Deut. 32, renews the threat of destruction on faithless Israel. We have the same theme in the slaughter of the king's disloyal citizens in the Pounds (19.14, 27), in Jesus' weeping over the coming visitation of Jerusalem (19.41-4), and in the (Marcan) destruction of the Wicked Husbandmen (20.918): but there is much Marcan material to be covered, and the references to Deuteronomy lapse. It is not unnatural for those who have traced relationships between the Gospels and the Jewish calendar to be impressed with their discoveries, or inventions. Dr Carrington, in a moment of unhappy 1 2

pp. 172, 151 below. 17.20, 'Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming . . . ' , provides the foil question for the teaching on the Coming of the Son of Man. Such doctrine is primarily for the Church, so there is a secondary introduction at 17.22, 'And he said to the disciples'.

confidence, spoke of mathematical calculation,1 and I sense a similar note, Heureka, behind the work of Dr Guilding:2 yet neither does Guilding agree with Carrington, nor I with either, nor, I think, does any established scholar. Let the reader beware. Such correspondences, found in order, suggesting plausible views of Gospel origins, and novel and extensive vistas into the world of the first century, are heady stuff. Each correspondence is a double selection, sometimes only a verse or two out of five chapters with a verse or two from a lection of ten or twenty. Sometimes no sidra text can be alleged, sometimes only a general parallel of thought. It is too early to speak of demonstration. What has appeared, it seems to me, is a volume of evidence sufficient to make the general picture I drew in the first Chapter worthy of serious examination: for so much would be explained by it—the emphasis in the Prologue on order, on fulfilment of Scripture and on catechesis; the Genesis atmosphere of Luke 1—2; the differences between Luke and Matthew in the Infancy stories; the placing of the Genealogy and the Rejection at Nazareth; the points of change from Matthew to Mark and back; the structure of the Sermon on the Plain; the topics of Luke 7; the Long Omission; and the Deuteronomic and catechetical features of the Journey. A thesis of this kind cannot be demonstrated. It can only be falsified, and that has not happened, I might claim, hitherto. What we need now is a further test: if, perhaps, it could be shown how the Jews of the first century read the Histories, or Isaiah, we could try the haphfardt out against the now fixed Lucan lections. It would not be proof, but if they fitted on the scale we have found in the Torah, it would take a hardened sceptic to refuse the thesis then. Surely the honest Cleopas who has tramped the dusty four-source, Form-critical road from Jerusalem in perplexity and sadness would then feel his heart burn within him! O foolish, he would cry, and slow of heart was I to believe all that Moses and the prophets foretold, in order! 1

P. Carrington, The Primitive Christian Calendar (Cambridge 1952), p. 37. Carrington was the first to propose a thoroughgoing lectionary division of a Synoptic Gospel, and to draw on the manuscript divisions as evidence of lections. 2 A. Guilding, The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship.

TABLE III The Sidrot and St Luke's Gospel DATE

LUKE

SIDRA

Iyyar I 5. Gen. 23—25.18 Iyyar II 6. 25.19—28.9 •7. 28.10—32.2 Iyyar III Iyyar IV 8. 32.3—36 37—40 Sivan I 9. Pentecost S. 10. 41—44.17 Sivan III 11. 44.18—47.27 Sivan IV 12. 47.28—50 Sivan V 13. Exod. 1—6.1 14. 6.2—9 Tammuz I 15. 10—13.16 Tammuz II 13.17—17 Tammuz III 16. Tammuz IV 17. 18—20 18. 21—24 Ab I 19. 25—27.19 Ab II 20. 27.20—30.10 Ab III 21. 30.11—34 Ab IV 22. 35—38.20 Elul I Elul II 23. 38.21—40 Eluim 24. Lev. 1—6.7 25. 6.8—8 Elul IV Elul V 26. 9—11 New Year S. 27. 12—13 28. 14—15 Tishri II 16—18 Atonement 29. Atonement S. 30. 19—20 Tabernacles S. 31. 21—24 Tishri IV 32. 25—26.2 Cheshvan I 33. 26.3—27 Cheshvan II 34. Num. 1—4.20 Cheshvan III 35. 4.21—7 Cheshvan IV 36. 8—12 Kislev I 37. 13—15 38. 16—18 Kislev II 19—22.1 39. Kislev III 40. 22.2—25.9 Kislev IV 41. 25.10—29 Kislev V 42. 30—32 Tebeth I 43. 33—36 Tebeth II Tebeth III 44. Deut. 1—3.22

Sarah's Life The Descendants And he went forth And he sent And he dwelt At the End And he drew near And he lived The Names And I appeared Go in When he let them go Jethro The Ordinances The Offering You shall command When you take And he assembled The Sum And he called Command On the eighth Day If she conceives The Leper After the Death Holy Say On the Mountain In my Statutes In the Wilderness Take the Census When you set up Send you Korah The Statute Balak Phinehas Tribes The Stages The Words

Tebeth IV

45.

3.23—7.11

And I besought

Shebat I

46.

7.12—11.25

When

Shebat II

47.

11.26—16.17 Behold

103

(c) (a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c)

1.5-25 1.26-56 1.57-80 2.1-40 2.41-52 3.1-20 3.21-38 4.1-13 4.14-30 4.31-7 4.38-44 5.1-11 5.12-16 5.17-26 5.27-39 6.1-5 6.6-11 6.12-19

John's Annunciation s Jesus' Annunciation s John's Births Jesus'Births Jesus Aged 12 s John's Preaching f Baptism, Genealogy s Temptations s Rejection at Nazareth s Demoniac in Synagogue m Simon's Wife's Mother m First Apostles Called The Leper m The Paralytic m Levi's House m The Cornfield m The Withered Hand m Call of Twelve m

6.20-49 7.1-10 7.11-17 7.18-35

Sermon on the Plain s The Centurion's Slave s The Widow at Nain s John from Prison f

7.36-50 Sinner Forgiven f 8.1-18 Sower, etc. f 8.19-21 Mother and Brothers m 8.22-5 Storm on Lake m 8.26-39 Gerasene Demoniac m 8.40-8 Woman with Issue ms 8.49-56 Ruler's Daughter ms 9.1-9 Mission of Twelve ms 9.10-17 Feeding of 5000 m 9.18-27 Peter's Confession (m)s 9.28-36 Transfiguration mf 9.37-43a Demoniac Boy m 9.43b-48 The Greatest m 9.49-50 The Strange Exorcist m 9.51-62 Samaritan Village s 10.1-16 Mission of Seventy s 10.17-24 Return and Joy s 10.25-37 Lawyer, Samaritan s 10.38-42 Mary and Martha s 11.1-13 Prayers 11.14-28 Beelzebul Healing s 11.29-36 Jonah, Lights 11.37-54 Woes on Pharisees s 12.1-12 Fearless Confession s 12.13-40 Detachments 12.41—13.9 Judgement for all

(contd) DATE Shebat III ShebatIV Adar I Adar II Adarm Adar IV Adar V Nisan I Nisan II

LUKE

SIDRA 48.

16.18—21.9

49.

21.10—25

50.

26—29.9

51.

29.10—30

52.

31

53.

32

54.

33—34

1. Gen. 1—6.8 2.

6.9—11

(a) 13.10-21 Bent Woman s (b) 13.22-35 Israel Rejected s (c) 14.1-24 Pharisee's Dinner s When you go forth (a) 14.25-35 Tower, Embassy, Salt s (b) 15.1-32 Sheep, Coin, Son s (c) 16.1-13 Unjust Steward s When you come (a) 16.14—17.4 Care of pucpot s (b) 17.5-10 Servant of all work s (c) 17.11-19 Ten Lepers s You stand (a) 17.20-37 Day of the Son of Man s 18.1-8 Unjust Judge s (C) 18.9-14 Pharisee & Publican s And he continued (a) 18.15-17 Children blessed ms Cb) 18.18-34 Rich Ruler ms (c) 18.35-43 Bartimaeus ms 19.1-10 Zacchaeus Give Ear 19.11-28 Pounds s 19.29-40 Approach to City m This is the Blessing (a) 19.41-8 Lament, Entry m 20.1-8 Authority Question m k 20.9-18 Wicked Husbandmen m In the Beginning (a) 20.19-26 Tribute Question m 20.27-44 Sadducees, David's Son m 20.45—21.4 Widows, Widow's Mite m Noah 21.5-38 Apocalyptic Discourse ms Judges

&

Passover 6 p.m. 9 p.m. Midnight 3 a.m. 6 a.m. 9 a.m. Noon 3 p.m. Nisan III Nisan IV

3. Gen. 12—17 4. 18—22

Go you And he appeared

22.1-23 Last Supper m 22.24-39 Conversation at Supper m 22.40-53 Agony and Arrest m 22.54-65 Peter's Denial m 22.66—23.12 Trials: Sanhedrin, Pilate, Herod m 23.13-32 Pilate's Condemnation m 23.33-43 Crucifixion m 23.44-56 Death and Burial m 24.1-12 The Resurrection m 24.13-53 Easter Appearances s

The sabbaths are set out for a fuller year than can ever occur in practice, to provide for the 54 sidrdt. I have made the third, sixth, ninth, and twelfth months (Sivan, Elul, Kislev and Adar) five-sabbath months. When any of these was excessive, two sidrdt would be combined at the end of a book (see p. 37). For the principles for dividing Luke, see pp. 74 ff. As Tabernacles begins on 15 th Tishri, there can only ever be two Saturday nights in Tishri before Tabernacles: hence two Lucan lections only will be required, cf. pp. 87 f. s signifies a correspondence between the Lucan lection and the sidrd. f signifies a correspondence between the Lucan lection and the theme of the feast. m signifies a correspondence in order and content between the Lucan lection and Mark.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HISTORIES CYCLE

When we were discussing the development of the Torah cycle, I was able to make a straightforward claim. We know that the sidrdt in use today go back to Amoraic times, to at least the year 300; I have merely claimed that the same sidrot were in use two centuries earlier, and have adduced Philo and other evidence. The sidrdt are the same sidrdt. When we come to consider the prophetic cycle, things are not so simple. The cycle of prophetic readings, or haphfardt, in use today is not a series: it is a selection from the five prophetic 'books' as counted by the Jews—that is, (1) the 'Former Prophets', our Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, (2) Isaiah, (3) Jeremiah, (4) Ezekiel, and (5) 'the Twelve' (Minor Prophets). The passages so selected are listed in Table I on pp. 67-9 of this book. From this it will be seen that apart from a section of Isaiah readings from sabbaths 44 to 52, to which I shall return, there is no order in the list. There are 28 readings from the Former Prophets, or Histories, as I shall call them, 18 from Isaiah, 9 from Jeremiah, 10 from Ezekiel, and 17 from the Twelve. There is thus a fair spread of readings, and they follow each other in a jumble, rather like the Gospels in the Book of Common Prayer; and just as I have been maintaining that behind the liturgical selection in our Prayer Book stand three original liturgical series, the three Synoptic Gospels, so shall I be suggesting in this chapter that behind our traditional haphfardt stood five original cycles, the five books of the Prophets. The selection of the traditional haphfardt, while not ordered, is not random. The principle governing the selection is that the theme of the haphfarah should be the same as, or should be a commentary on, the theme of the sidra-, and this is certainly a very ancient principle, for it applies to the haphfardt for the feasts and for the four special sabbaths in Adar, which are likely to be the oldest ones of all,1 as well as to most of those for the sabbaths. In the right-hand column of Table I, I have indicated the theme common to the Law and Prophetic readings as traditionally understood. The importance 1

So Biichler, art. cit., pt. II, pp. 7 ff., Elbogen, JG, pp. 174 ff. Both Biichler's and Elbogen's accounts of the development of the haphfardt are confessedly built upon their respective theories for the sidrdt, which I have criticized above, pp. 57, 59 f.

of a common theme is testified explicitly in the Talmud in the debate between Exod. 30.11-16 and Num. 28.1-15 as the lesson for sabbath Sheqalim: 'Now according to the one who says that Ki Tissa' (Exod. 30.11 ff.) should be said, there is good reason for reading Jehoiada the Priest (2 Kings 12) as haphfarah, because it is similar in subject, as it is written, "The money of the persons for whom each man is rated".' 1 2 Kings 12 is about King Jehoash's collection for the repair of the Temple, and this corresponds with the theme of the Exod. 30 lesson, and even, in v. 4, refers to the assessment laid down in Exod. 30: since both parties are agreed that 2 Kings 12 was the haphfarah, there is a forceful argument to the correctness of Exod. 30 as the Torah portion, granted the principle that the haphfarah echoes the sidra. This principle applies in all the festal and special readings, and in all the sabbath readings up to no. 41, and it should be taken as the foundation of any theory of the development of prophetic lections.

(i) Five Alternative Prophetic Cycles There are four considerations which make it unlikely that the traditional selection of haphfardt was in operation in the first century A.D.; one, the corollary of a comment in the Mishnah; one, an indication from the length and structure of the traditional selection; one, an inference from the Targums; and one, a more general perspective. We know that the prophets were read in synagogues in Luke's day (Luke 4.17; Acts 13.15), and perhaps in the days of ben-Sira's grandson (Prologue), but it is difficult to draw any confident conclusions from this evidence. If Luke is telling us the truth, that Jesus really read a haphfarah from Isa. 61; or if he was familiar with a reading system that included Isa. 61, and supposed that Jesus read this passage; then plainly the traditional cycle was not yet in operation, for there is no haphfarah which includes the opening verses of the chapter. But then, Luke might well just suppose that this would be the ideal chapter to read, and he often gets small points of Jewish practice wrong.2 So all we can be sure of is that there was a prophetic lesson, and it might have been taken (i) at the local official's choice, or (ii) from the present cycle, or (iii) from an earlier cycle. The present cycle is first evidenced about 300: 'Rabbah and R. Joseph both concurred in ruling that a scroll containing only the haphfarahs should not be read from on Sabbath', 3 and R. Jeremiah, about the 1

b Meg. 29b. e.g. tithing rules, 11.42; 'the day of Unleavened Bread', 22.7. 3 b Git. 60a. Rabbah's scroll could of course have contained a cycle different 2

same date, refers to 'the order from the portions of the prophets'. 1 In the Mishnah and Tosefta we find a number of prophetic passages which are either forbidden to be read out, or forbidden to be translated; and it is these rules that tell us that neither local choice nor the present cycle was in operation in the second century. 'The Blessing of the Priests (Num. 6.24-6), and the story of David (and Bathsheba, 2 Sam. 11) and of Amnon (2 Sam. 13) are read out but not interpreted. They may not use the chapter of the Chariot (Ezek. 1) as a reading from the Prophets; but R. Judah permits it. R. Eliezer says, They do not use the chapter, "Cause Jerusalem to know" (Ezek. 16) as a reading from the prophets.' 2 The Tosefta testifies the actual use of Ezek. 16.3 Now of the four prophetic passages mentioned here, only Ezek. 1 is in the traditional selection (for the first day of Pentecost, R. Judah's opinion having triumphed). The remaining three passages are (naturally) not in the present cycle; but there would have been no point in banning them if the present cycle had been in operation at the time. Hence the present cycle was not in existence until the third century. But the four passages are not all banned from reading; had they been so, it would have been possible that local choice was the rule. Only Ezek. 1 and 16 are banned from reading, the former because it encouraged Gnostic speculations,4 the latter because, as R. Eliezer put it, 'Why do you pry after the abomination of Jerusalem? Go, inquire first after your mother's shame.'5 The two stories from 2 Sam., however, were to be read, but not interpreted; and the same goes for Judg. 19 and 2 Sam. 16.21, according to the Tosefta.6 All these passages are accounts of sexual outrage, and were not to be translated because of their indecency. Now, the purpose of reading the prophets in public was the edification of Israel, and it is simply incredible that the authorities should have ordained the reading of such passages at the will of the local synagogue officer while withholding a Targum; like Gibbon, retailing pornography in the decent obscurity of a dead language. No: it must have been the case that all the prophetic material was read out and translated unless it was forbidden. Judg. 19 and 2 Sam. 11, 13 and 16 were all part of a continuous cycle of the Former Prophets, and went on being read out because they were part of that from the traditional one; but the burden of proving a different cycle so late would be a heavy one. b Meg. 30b. 2 m Meg. 4.10. 3 t Meg. 4.34. 4 Biichler, p. 3 f. 5 b Meg. 25b; j Meg. m.10. 6 t Meg. 4.31. 1

cycle; but for decency's sake the Targum could be omitted. The Ezekiel chapters were even more unsuitable, and the move was to suppress them completely. There was too much prophetic material, of course, to be covered in one year: the Luke 4 passage shows us that a synagogue opted for one prophetic book at a time, presumably for a year, in this case the book of Isaiah. A second pointer to an original period in which there were five alternative prophetic cycles is the length of the traditional haphfardt. The average haphfarah is around 25 verses long, or about a chapter of the prophetic books as we divide them. The references in them to the sidrd are often only two or three verses in length, sometimes only a word or two, usually at the beginning: for instance, sidra 7, Jacob's flight to Haran, has Hos. 12.12—14.9 as haphfarah, of which only the first verse is apposite, 'Jacob fled to the land of Aram, there Israel did service for a wife, and for a wife he herded sheep'. The haphfardt for the triennial cycle were commonly of a few verses, a 'closure' to the Torah lesson, which is what haphfarah literally means. As there would be no motive for adding irrelevant verses which did not fit the sidra, the 25-verse prophetic lesson is likely to be old. Now there are 66 chapters in our Isaiah, 52 in Jeremiah, 48 in Ezekiel, and 67 in the Twelve, so that a division into a cycle of fiftyodd readings would require a lesson of just about the length we have. Indeed, over half the Isaiah and Twelve readings are rather over a chapter in length, while only four of the Jeremiah and Ezekiel lessons are so much: proportions which would be required by the relative lengths of the books if they were to be used for annual reading cycles. The only considerable abbreviation will be in the Histories, which would need nearly three chapters per sabbath for them to be covered in a year; and we can well understand the later limitation to a norm of one chapter, one story usually, in line with the Latter Prophets lessons. The evidence for original prophetic lessons of about a chapter goes back behind the present haphfardt to a traditional saying in the Talmud: 'He who says the haphfarah from the Prophet should not read less than twenty-one verses, corresponding to (those read by) the seven who have read in the Torah' (b Meg. 23a). Seven readers each sabbath must read a minimum of three verses apiece from the Torah, and the total haphfarah must reach this minimum also. We have no evidence of three-chapter readings for the Histories from the rabbis; but we are fortunate enough to have such from Origen. Origen's Second Homily on the Book of Kingdoms opens: 'What has been read comprises several stories (t& &vayvaxy06vToc rtXefovft San); and so we must cut them in two sections to speak.

There was read the next story (xd fe^fj?) about Nabal the Carmelite (1 Sam. 25); then after that the story about David's hiding with the Ziphites, and his delation by them, and Saul's coming to take David . . . (1 Sam. 26); then next the third story, when David fled to Achar king of Gath . . . (1 Sam. 27). Following this the famous story of the witch and about Samuel... (1 Sam. 28). There being four pericopae, each of which contains no small matter, and such as can occupy those who can expound for not one but several (nteidvcov) hours of the synaxis—let the bishop indicate which of the four he wishes, that we may occupy ourselves with that. (The Bishop) said, "Let the story of the witch be expounded".' 1 This paragraph is a gift from heaven, it tells us so much: (i) on the week in question four chapters of 1 Sam. were read, 1 Sam. 25—28; (ii) the reading followed on in order (xd 65fis) from what had been read on the previous week; (iii) the reading was longer than was usual, so that the preacher could not cover it all; (iv) the sermon was an exposition of the O.T. reading. It seems clear that we can infer a lectio continua of the Prophets in the third-century Church, with a series of Histories readings that would last just about a year; and we have an indication that the same practice may have been in use in Judaism, and in the church of Luke, a century and a half earlier. Surely Origen's church did not invent such an elaborate reading scheme. But it is not only the length of the traditional haphfardt which suggests the presence of an earlier and more comprehensive system; there is also a feature of the selection which indicates the same. Whereas in general the haphfardt are a jumble, from haphfarah 46 there is a series of readings from II- and Ill-Isaiah which are very nearly in order, and not far from a continuous sequence: Isa. 49.14— 51.4; 54.11—55.6; 51.12—52.13; 54.1-10; 60; 61.10—63.9; and 65.6—66.8. The second passage, haphfarah 47, is out of sequence; and the passages omitted are the Suffering Servant, the challenges of 55—56, the Fasting sequence of 57—59, and the rebukes of 63.10—65.5—about a half of the sixteen chapters. Now, the interesting thing is that the relation of correspondence with the sidrd which applies to all the festal haphfardt, and to the first forty-one sabbath haphfardt, breaks down from week 42 on: these Isaiah readings do not correspond with the Law readings against which they stand— they do not 'fit' at all. The explanation offered for this by Jewish tradition is that they are seven Haphfardt of Consolation, and are preceded by three Haphfardt of Rebuke. No doubt this is so; but words of consolation are not found in II- and Ill-Isaiah only, nor need they have fallen so nearly in series. What we need to know is 1

PG 12.1011, cited by Righetti, SL, p. 230.

why the selectors of the readings decided at this point to take a series of Haphfardt of Consolation; why break off the hitherto invariable relationship with the sidrSl Indeed, to be more accurate, the seven Haphfardt of Consolation begin one week earlier, with Isa. 40.1-26 as no. 45, and Isa. 65.6—66.8 ends the series without being a 'Consolation' lesson at all. The suggestion I am making is that IIand Ill-Isaiah had been read for centuries opposite to Numbers and Deuteronomy, and that the readings opposite Deuteronomy had begun at about Isa. 50. Then, with the break-up of the system of alternative cycles, the Babylonian authorities set Isa. 55.6—56.8 for 9th Ab—'Seek ye the Lord while he may be f o u n d . . . let the wicked forsake his way ...'—and Isa. 57.14—58.14 for Yom Kippur—'Is not such the fast that I have chosen?'—as they are found in the traditional list. 9th Ab falls about the 45th sidra in the Babylonian order, and Yom Kippur about the 53rd: there are sixty days between them, eight or nine sabbaths. The popular 'consolation' readings were then retained in approximately the old order, eight of them for the eight sabbaths 45-52 between the two fasts; and such 'rebuke' passages as were not used for the fasts were omitted. However, 9th Ab cast its shadow before; as it is said, 'When Ab comes in, gladness must be diminished'.1 So before the consolation sabbaths three sabbaths of rebuke were observed, each of whose haphfardt looked forward to the fall of Jerusalem, Jer. 1—2.3, Jer. 2.4-28 and Isa. 1.1-27. In this way it is possible to account for the breaking off of the sidra-haphfarah correspondences after no. 41, the zeal of Phinehas and Elijah, and for the series of late-Isaiah readings set. The matter would seem to be clinched by the now widespread acceptance of an early dating for a complete Targum of the Prophets. The Targums were liturgical translations of the Bible. They had their origin in the synagogue, or other Jewish worship, and were provided so that the people could understand the Scriptures read out. The idea is first referred to by the Chronicler in his description of Ezra's reading and translation/exposition of the Law (Neh. 8.8). By the time of the Mishnah the m'thurg'man is an established figure. One verse of the Law is read, and he then translates; up to three verses of the Prophets are read, and he then translates (m Meg. 4.4). He may not read the Targum, lest it become miqrff like the Scripture; he must know it by heart and recite.2 Now, had the pattern of public reading of the Prophets been either the present traditional selection, or similar selections in different centres, from which the present selection was derived, then the pro1 3

m Taan. 4.6. Pes. R.14b; J. Bowker, TRL, p. 12.

phetic Targum would have been limited to just those passages that were so used. But in fact Jonathan is, and all the other prophetic Targums seem to have been, translations of the whole prophetic canon. Indeed, with the exception of Neofiti, all the Targums translated the passages which we have just seen to be forbidden in the Mishnah and Tosefta, where the texts survive, and it is believed that an earlier recension of Neofiti did the same.1 It is features like this which have persuaded Targumic scholars that the Targums are substantially earlier than the Mishnah, and there are thought to be quotations from them in the sayings of the Tannaitic rabbis, and in the New Testament; 2 ''lohi '«lohi lama s'bhaqtani being the most

famous (if partially Hebraized). Passages from the Targum of Job have been found at Qumran. 3 Now, if complete Targums to the whole prophetic canon existed in the first century (and very likely, at least in oral forms, earlier), it seems inescapable that the whole prophetic canon was in liturgical use in this period. Selection theories cannot be correct, for they would have resulted in Targums of the selections. Local ad hoc choice would hardly seem credible: would the m'thurg'man have been able to recite from any passage on demand? We need some such hypothesis as our present one, of alternative cyclical use of all the prophetic writings, if we are to explain the early existence of so complete an Aramaic translation. It seems to me that these matters—the passages whose translation was forbidden, the length of the traditional prophetic lessons, the sequence of Isaiah lections without corresponding sidrdt, and the early date of complete Targums—suffice to make an original lectio continua of the prophets the best working hypothesis. In what follows I have attempted a more speculative reconstruction of the development of the reading cycle: if the reader does not find this persuasive, the arguments set out so far will still stand. In the older commentaries, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve were referred to as 'the writing prophets' to distinguish them from Samuel, Elijah, etc. If they did not write themselves, they perhaps dictated to disciples who could, as Jeremiah does to Baruch in Jer. 36, or Isaiah who says, 'Bind up the testimony, seal the teaching among my disciples' (Isa. 8.16). These disciples then made 'collections of sayings', together with certain biographical and 1

A. Diez Macho, The Recently Discovered Palestinian Targum (Supp. to VT VII, Leiden 1960), M. McNamara, The New Testament and the Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch (Rome 1966); cf. Bowker, TRL, p. 19. 3 M. McNamara, Targum and Testament (Shannon 1972). 3 G. L. Harding, 'Recent Discoveries in Jordan', Palestine Exploration Quarterly, xc (1958), 7-18: cf. Bowker, TRL, p. 15.

autobiographical matter; and these collections of sayings were then 'edited' by later 'hands' or 'editors', and formed into larger units such as Isa. 1—39, or whole prophetic books.1 Today this whole picture looks anachronistic: the scholars who undertook it were literary critics, and made the books into literary works. But the setting in life of much prophecy, most evident in the case of Ezekiel2 and Deutero-Isaiah,3 was liturgical: the 'writing' prophets prophesied in public, often at the great festivals,4 just as much as Micaiah ben-Imlah. And the perpetuation of the prophecies, and their glossing, will have taken place in a liturgical context also. We cannot see a 'school' of disciples of Isaiah annotating the master's oracles as the scholiast did the Aeneid. The whole picture is too bookish. Ezekiel prophesied against Egypt in Nisan of the eleventh year (30.20) and the twenty-seventh year (29.17), and he and his disciples repeated the prophecies, or parts of them, with or without elaborations, when the Lord moved them to prophesy against Egypt in later years. If there was vision, if there were prophets, there were new oracles; if not, the old oracles could be repeated, and glosses could be added (often re-interpreting the original). Thus those prophecies would be preserved which were of use to the worshipping community; and in the time of the exile, when the tradition was imperilled, they will have been written down. It is important to recognize that we have no external evidence of the process of preservation of the prophecies, and that the internal evidence is consonant with both a literary and a liturgical theory. It is just that the literary theory is quite implausible. The disciples of Isaiah are self-evidently closer in genre to the four hundred prophets led by Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah than they are to the talmtdhe-h "khamtrn poring over the biblical text in an A.D. beth-hammidrash. But if the prophecies were first uttered in many cases in a liturgical context, and were repeated in a liturgical context; and if we find them in A.D. 300 still being proclaimed in a liturgical context; surely the presumption is that they were used in a liturgical context throughout. Those communities which followed Isaiah most enthusiastically produced cycles of Isaiah prophecies which they at first recited, and later read, at worship round the year; those which were most historically conscious produced the Histories cycle; and so on. 1 2 3

4

Such a general picture is still given in O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament (E.T. Oxford 1966), pp. 146 ff. See pp. 28 f. C. Westermann, Isaiah 40-66 (E.T. London 1969), pp. 27 f. The case for a liturgical development of prophecy within an Isaiah-school is argued by J. H. Eaton, 'The Origin of the Book of Isaiah?' VT1X.2 (1959), 138-57. Ezek. 40.1; Hag. 2.1.

Anything which was not used in the worship of one community or another was forgotten and lost; only those units which were in use in worship were written down, and so became canonical. Such would seem to be a more plausible account of the genesis of the prophetic books; and we are in a position to test it, because we can apply the principle cited above. If, in general, each of the prophetic books contains material which corresponds to, or comments on, the material in the Torah, taken in order, then there is a convincing case for supposing that the prophetic books were ordered to that end: to provide haphfardt for the given sidrdt. In the present chapter I will attempt a reconstruction of the Histories in that sense. In the nature of the case, we cannot look for an unbroken series of parallels round the year. History does not repeat itself so precisely, and could hardly be forced into such a mould; nor could it be expected that any of the prophets would have provided oracles suited to all the different parts of the Torah. We are looking for a partial series of parallels, like Luke with the Torah in the last chapter. And because the series must be partial, it is easy to understand why in the end the system broke down. Who wants a system with five alternative prophetic cycles, none of which provides a satisfying series of haphfardt to comment on the sidrdt! As the old annual system of sidrdt broke down in the second century A.D. through its own top-heaviness, being replaced in some places by a triennial cycle, in others by the Babylonian Tishri-cycle, so the way was open to simplify the haphfardt cycle also. The earlier serial cycles were replaced by a single eclectic cycle, containing some readings which had fitted the sidra well, and others which had not hitherto been used with the sidra, but suggested themselves: for example, perhaps none of the earlier cycles had provided an apposite comment on Lev. 13 and 14, the leprosy chapters; but the stories of Naaman, and of the Lepers at the Siege of Samaria, could be used, and were, in a sense, ideal comments on the relative laws. So the present, eclectic, prophetic cycle came to be: each haphfarah, now freely selected, could be made to measure the sidra, and could be short and relevant. It is true that the congregation will now become familiar with fifty chapters of the prophets instead of four hundred; that the thrust and movement of the prophetic books, especially the Histories, is lost; that the achievements of correspondence in the course of the actual development of the prophetic cycles were ploughed under the ground, and the mind of the authors and developers of the prophecies were obscured for seventeen centuries. But then, liturgical reform is a juggernaut with which our own generation is also familiar, and woe betide any thought or value that stands in its way.

(ii) The Formation of the D Histories Cycle The Histories are the work of the Deuteronomistic school in exile, and it is at this point that we need to return to the setting in life of the D-corpus. Von Rad isolated Deut. 4.44—30.20 as the original, seventh-century nucleus of the work, and concluded that these chapters 'can have been taken only from a cultic celebration, perhaps from a feast of renewal of the covenant'.1 Such a view might command broad agreement, but it raises the question of the remainder of the corpus. If '1.1—4.43 and 31—34 must be assigned to other literary contexts, probably to the so-called Deuteronomistic historical work', 2 what are we to make of the fact that this additional material is also strongly paraenetic; and that the whole historical enterprise has exactly the same not very subtle hortatory purpose? If we know from a paragraph like Deut. 15.1-11 that an early apodeictic law has been applied as a conditional law, and then expounded by the preacher,3 and that this is an indication of the cultic milieu of the central part of the book, surely exactly the same indications are present in such passages as Josh. 1, or Judg. 2, or 1 Sam. 8, or 1 Kings 8, or 2 Kings 17. Sometimes the preacher speaks indirectly through Samuel or Solomon; sometimes he mounts the pulpit in person. The completed D-corpus was never intended to be a literary work, laid by, like Hilkiah's book of the law, to be found during Temple renovations. It was intended and used for liturgical proclamation. The notion of a literary D-corpus has given rise to speculations on the theology of the D-school, whose view of the essence of Israelite faith could be comprehended in an account of events between Moses' last days and the Exile.4 The unreality of this picture is shown by two considerations. First, the theology of the work is rooted in its relationship to the patriarchal period. The phrase, 'your fathers' occurs nearly fifty times in Deuteronomy alone, and of these the clause, 'which he/I swore/covenanted to your/their fathers' occurs in more than half. How, then, can the corpus Deut. 1—2 Kings 25 be considered as an independent theological unit? Secondly, on both the occasions when the D-authors describe a cultic situation in which there is a historical recital, the rehearsal begins not with 1 2 3 4

G. von Rad, Deuteronomy, p. 12. ibid., p. 12. ibid., p. 19. M. Noth, Vberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien (2e., Tubingen 1957) is responsible for this view of Deut.-Kings, which has 'met with much approval' (Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 244).

Moses' last days but in Genesis. In Deut. 26 the harvest-thanksgiving confession begins, 'A wandering Aramaean was my father'; and whether this be Abraham who first came wandering from Aram, or Jacob who went down to Egypt and sojourned there, the reference is to the patriarchs. In Josh. 24—Joshua's farewell speech, as Deuteronomy 1—33 is Moses' farewell speech—the recital begins expressly at Gen. 12: 'Your fathers lived of old beyond the Euphrates . . . Then I took your father Abraham'. The situation seems clear. The D-work is not a self-supporting theological structure: it is an added wing, extending an already accepted patriarchal edifice. The D-authors knew the J and E traditions (as we can tell from the Genesis-Numbers references they give). Their pattern of cultic recitation began with these traditions, supplemented by Deuteronomy in the fuller form they gave it; and continued with the history of the occupation and exile from Joshua to 2 Kings. I have argued above that from the post-exilic period the Pentateuch was recited in worship in a sabbath cycle from the beginning of Nisan; 1 and there are indications that the book of Joshua was treated similarly. The traditional cycle begins on Simhath Torah today with the reading of the end of Deuteronomy and the first chapter of Genesis, and the haphfarah is Josh. 1. With its command to meditate on the Law, Josh. 1 is not unsuitable for the occasion, but it cannot escape our notice that the year begins with an exact liturgical parallel: the first chapter of the Histories is set alongside the first chapter of the Law. Thus in the earlier cycle (if similar lessons obtained), the reading of the Creation and of Josh. 1 would have been on the first sabbath in Nisan, perhaps with other matter. Now, fourteen days into Nisan falls Passover, and the oldest Passover haphfarah, in the Talmud, is 'from Joshua about Gilgal',2 now adopted as the haphfarah for the first day of the feast as Josh. 5.2—6.1.3 The passage includes not only the account of the first Passover in the land, and the eating of unleavened cakes on the day following (5.10 f.), but also the circumcision by Joshua (5.2-9), and the beginning of the Jericho story (5.13—6.1). The events in the opening chapters of Joshua are carefully dated. The Jordan is crossed in Josh. 3—4, and it is said, 'the people came up out of Jordan on the tenth day of the first month' (4.19). The sending of 1 2 3

See pp. 29 ff., above. b Meg. 31a The Jewish Encyclopaedia vi, 136, art. 'Haftarah' cites Josh. 3.5—4.1 (the crossing of the Jordan dryshod) as haphfarah for the first day of Passover, referring to Halachoth Pesukoth, p. 132, and Halachoth Gedoloth, p. 617. The variant tradition shows how closely the whole of Josh. 1—6 is tied in with the liturgical celebration of Passover.

the spies took place three days earlier (1.11; 2.22; 3.2), i.e. on the 7th. Passover is eaten on 14th (5.10), and unleavened cakes on 15th; and for the seven days following Jericho is invested. Such attention to dating must surely have a liturgical significance (cf. Exod. 12.3 for the 10th Nisan); and suggests the possibility of parallel liturgical usage: Nisan I In the Beginning Josh. 1—2 Spies to Jericho Nisan II Noah Josh. 3—4 Across Jordan, Twelve Stones Nisan 14th Exodus Josh. 5—6 Recircumcision, Passover, Siege of Jericho. Such a pattern would help to explain the assimilation that has clearly taken place between the Moses and the Joshua stories. The Exodus and the Entry both take place on 14th Nisan. Both are associated with a theophany in which Moses/Joshua is told, 'Put off your shoes from your feet; for the place where you stand is holy' (Josh. 5.15; cf. Exod. 3.5). Both entail the miracle of the waters of the Red Sea/Jordan being cut off and rising in a heap while the children of Israel pass over dryshod (Josh. 3.14-17; Exod. 14.21 ff). In both, circumcision is represented as necessary before eating the Passover (Exod. 12.48; Josh. 5.2 ff.). Both culminate in a sevenfold series of blows, the seven plagues of Egypt1 and the seven encirclements of Jericho, with a climactic seventh, the release from Egypt and the fall of the city. We can see the two events already assimilated in the 114th Psalm, 'When Israel came out of Egypt . . . the sea saw that and fled, Jordan was driven back . . . ' For the first two units we are on less sure ground, because we cannot be certain with what form of creation story D was familiar. It is true that Israel's crossing of the sea is often assimilated to Yahweh's defeat of the waters in creation in II-Isaiah;2 and we cannot exclude the possibility of some play between Rahab the sea-monster, who is still Yahweh's antagonist in creation in Isa. 51.9, contemporary with D, 3 1

2 3

The seven plagues, as given in the 'Deuteronomic' Ps. 105, were darkness (.28), waters to blood (.29), frogs (.30), flies and gnats (.31), hail and lightning (.32 f.), locusts (.34 f.), death of the first-born (.36). This series has been combined with a variant tradition to produce the present ten plagues: a J with a P tradition, according to M. Noth, Exodus (E.T. London 1962), pp. 62-84. e.g. Isa. 42.5-9; 43.1-2, 15-16; 44.24-7; 51.9-10. The tradition of creation accepted in the sixth century clearly cannot have begun with our Gen. 1—2.4, which was not yet written. The (L-)J story in Gen. 2.4b ff. is not an account of creation: it begins, 'In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant of the field was yet in the earth . . . the Lord God formed man of dust'. It is the story of the forming of man and how he came to till the hitherto rainless ground. A creation story of which the centrepiece is the victory of Yahweh over Rahab is familiar to

a n d R a h a b the h a r l o t in Josh. 2. 1 W h e n we press on, however, the correspondence between Genesis a n d J o s h u a becomes m o r e evident. In G e n . 12—13 A b r a h a m comes to the land, a n d builds two altars, one at Shechem by the o a k of M o r e h , where the land is promised to his descendants (Gen. 12.6 f.), one between Bethel a n d Ai (12.8; 13.3), where a fuller promise is m a d e (13.14-17). J o s h u a fights the king of Ai between Bethel a n d Ai (Josh. 7—8), a n d builds an altar between the m o u n t a i n s of Ebal a n d Gerizim, where Shechem was (8.30), where he reads the Law to the people. 2 In G e n . 14 A b r a h a m overcomes f o u r kings in battle, a n d pays a tithe of the spoil to Melchizedek, king of Salem: in Josh. 9.1 f. the kings of C a n a a n gather against Joshua, a n d in Josh. 10 he overcomes five kings in battle, led by Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem. In G e n . 15—16 G o d promises A b r a h a m descendants as the stars, w h o will inherit the land of the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, etc.; a n d Ishmael is b o r n : in Josh. 11—12 the kings of the Canaanites, the Amorites, the Hittites a n d the rest join in battle against Joshua, w h o defeats t h e m a n d distributes their land. In G e n . 17 G o d m a k e s a covenant with A b r a h a m , to be G o d to him a n d his descendants in perpetuity, a n d seals the covenant with circumcision. O u r G e n . 17 is a p a r t of the Priestly tradition (not the community of Ps. 89, where it is combined with the Deuteronomic view (and wording) of the covenant of David, as well as to Deutero-Isaiah and the author of Job (9.13, 26.10). Such a story could hardly have survived in these references unless it was the standard account of creation before Gen. 1 was written: and we can well understand its suppression from Genesis once the less crude Gen. 1 account was available. 1 Rahab the sea-monster (and its derivative Rahab = Egypt) are Rahabh with a he: Rahab the harlot is Rahabh with a heth. The monster is derived from the root rhb, meaning rage, violence, noise, defiance, the verb meaning to rage or importune, the adjective meaning proud or defiant: the harlot from rhb, meaning to be wide, the noun meaning breadth or width, the adjective meaning wide, spacious, puffed up, haughty (especially in the phrase r'ftabh-lebh(abh), Ps. 101.6; Prov. 21.4; cf. 28.25). This closeness in meaning of the adjectives is coupled with muddles from time to time over the spelling: e.g., the Massoretic Text reads rohbam, their pride, for rohbam, their span, at Ps. 90.10, and is corrected by LXX. The harlot is spelt 'Pa&P, however, invariably in the LXX, which would seem to imply an original he, since heth is almost always transliterated with a x» he without a consonant in the LXX, e.g., 'Ah"rdn(lle) becomes "Aap(bv, 'Ahaz{heth) becomes 'Ax&£. So perhaps the two were originally spelt the same, and the he form, with its signification of rage and defiance, came to be preferred for the monster. 2 He reads the torah, the teaching, no doubt by the oak of Moreh (Gen. 12.6), the Teacher's Oak, cf. Josh. 24.26, Deut. 11.30. The parallel helps to explain the otherwise curious fact that when Joshua has just taken Bethel and Ai (8.1-29), he goes on immediately to build an altar in Mount Ebal (8.30 ff.), twenty-five miles away.

without 'a series of seams'1), but this must have superseded an earlier and simpler version known to D, because D also thought circumcision to be the seal of Israel's covenant with God (Deut. 10.16; Josh. 5). In Josh. 24 Joshua renews the covenant, and specifically draws out the continuity of God's action, beginning with his taking of Abraham, leading him through the land of Canaan, and making his offspring many. Three points should be noted in this analysis: its comprehensiveness, its order and its evenness. Most scholars assign Josh. 13—22 to later sources,2 so that we have fourteen chapters to D's Joshua; and these break down without forcing into seven units of two chapters apiece—the Spies, the Crossing of the Jordan, Passover and Jericho, Ai, the Conquest of the South, the Conquest of the North, Joshua's Farewell Speeches. All of these, with the possible exception of the first, have echoes with the Genesis stories up to Gen. 17, and the echoes are with the Genesis stories taken in order. The Joshua units are of even length besides: and comprehensiveness, correspondence in order and an even length of unit are together strong suggestions of lectionary parallel use. We should then have a conjectural opening of a D-cycle of readings: Nisan I Nisan II

In the Beginning Noah

Josh. 1—2 Spies to Jericho Josh. 3—4 Across Jordan, Twelve Stones Nisan 14th Exodus Josh. 5—6 Recircumcision, Passover, Jericho Nisan III Abraham at Bethel/ Josh. 7—8 Joshua v. Bethel/Ai, Law Shechem at Shechem Nisan IV Battle: Melchizedek Josh. 9—10 Battle v. Adonizedek: Hivites Iyyar I Land Promised, Josh. 11 f. Land Captured Ishmael Iyyar II Circumcision Josh. 23 f. Abraham's Covenant Covenant Renewed.

Such a series would not only concur with the traditional first and third haphfardt, but would amply agree with the principle that the haphfarah should take up the theme of the sidra. Now, this process of paralleling has been at work on through the two sagas which follow, the Patriarchal-Moses saga on the one side, and the Joshua-Kings saga on the other. The parallels have involved assimilation in both directions, from the Law to the Histories and 1 2

G. von Rad, Genesis (E.T. London 1961), p. 192. Eissfeldt, op. cit., pp. 251 f.

vice versa, and they are made on two levels, a general and a particular. It is important to recognize the general outline, so as to see the reasonableness of the detailed development. Fundamentally the Patriarchal saga stands to the Histories saga in a relationship of promise to fulfilment. Abraham is promised the land: Joshua takes the land. Jacob is the father of twelve sons to whom the land is destined: under twelve judges the land is occupied by the twelve tribes who bear the names of Jacob's sons. Moses delivers the people from oppression in Egypt, and begins the worship of Yahweh in the Tent: David delivers the people from the oppression of the Philistines, and establishes the worship at Jerusalem; where Solomon builds the Temple. The people rebel under Aaron and worship a golden calf, and are punished forty years in the desert: the people rebel under Jeroboam, who makes two golden calves, and are punished four hundred years with frustration, defeat and ultimately exile. Moses gives the Deuteronomic laws: the kings, and especially Manasseh, break them, and Josiah restores them. There is destruction and exile promised at the end of Deuteronomy, and return for the penitent (Deut. 30): and destruction, exile, and the freeing of King Jehoiachin close 2 Kings. The two sagas stand in a basic parallel which is not accidental, and is in essence much older than D. There is, to the religious Hebrew, a fundamental unity between what happened to the Patriarchs and what has happened since Joshua. God is the unchanging God who has acted classically with Abraham and Moses, and is acting to fulfil his purposes in tie same pattern to this day. This is urged repeatedly by Deutero-Isaiah. God has declared the ri'shdndth, the former things—the deliverance from Egypt, the crossing of the sea, the giving of water in the desert, the making of the golden calf: now he will do hadhdshoth, new things, in the same pattern1—deliverance from Babylon, coming out from exile, a highway and water in the desert. It is this theology which undergirds all prophecy, and which provides the interpretation of all history. The unity of theme between sidra and haphtarah is not a 1

cf. especially Isa. 43.16-19, 'Thus says the Lord, who makes a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters, who brings forth chariot and horse, army and warrior; they lie down, they cannot rise, they are extinguished, quenched like a wick: "Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing . . . " ' The prophet does not (of course) mean that Israel should stop remembering the Exodus (to which he has just recalled their memory), but that it will be nothing compared to the new deliverance: cf. Westermann, ad loc. In 41.22 'the former things' are the giving of water in the desert (cf. .17 ff.); in 46.7 they are the events leading to the Exodus, now to be transcended by Israel's deliverance by Cyrus (.8-13); in 48.3 they are the Golden Calf incident (,4/Exod. 32.9; .5/Exod. 32.4; .9/Exod. 32.12; .19/Exod. 32.13).

liturgical game: it is the expression of the belief that what God did classically in the Patriarchs he has continued to do through the 'Prophets'. It is this belief, enshrined in the liturgical structure of half a millennium, which invites the Christian evangelist to add a third and final lesson, a gospel: what God began in the Law and continued in the Prophets, he has completed in Christ. The general parallel is made plain by particular parallels, of which I propose to give only an outline here. The reconstruction is a speculative business, because we do not have either the D-Torah or the D-Histories in their sixth-century form: both have been overworked by redactors, who have inserted alien matter, and we are dependent upon the conclusions of modern scholars in isolating the D-material. Sometimes there is doubt over the order of events, and we must rely on hints in Deuteronomy itself, or in the historical psalms linked to it. We have no ancient indication of the subdivisions of the text, and apart from the logic of the stories have little to go on but guesswork. I offer my reconstruction with the greatest tentativeness, to show how things may have been in 540 B.C.; because only on such a basis is it possible to understand how the Chronicler's work came to be written in liturgical parallel to our present Torah 1 —with texts not far from those standing in our Massoretic Text, and the order fixed, and the Pentateuchal subdivisions given in the sidrdt; and because only on such a basis is it possible to understand how the Histories came to be read in liturgical parallel with the Torah in the first centuries B.C. and A.D.—with our texts and our order and our sidrdt. I cannot, and do not need to, show how things were in D's time in detail: I do need to show that the general picture I have just given is plausible beyond the book of Joshua. My reconstruction is set out in Table IV on p. 139. The order of events in Joshua is fixed by the logic of the story, and can never have been very different from that in which it now stands. The order of events in Judges has hardly any logic. The stories were once independent units, often foundation legends of different shrines. They have been placed in rough chronological order, with Samson and the Philistines (and other Danite and Benjaminite stories) last; we do not know by whom, whether the Deuteronomists or the Redactors. What is striking is the series of parallels between the Judges stories and the middle chapters of Genesis, 18—35. An angel appears to Gideon at Ophrah, and he offers him a meal of meat and cakes under the oak-tree, just as Abraham did to the angel(s) in Gen. 18. The old man at Gibeah 1

See above, pp. 38-40, below, pp. 126-129: MLM, ch. 10.

entertains the Levite for the night, as Lot entertained the angels at Sodom in Gen. 19, and the men of the city virtually re-enact the Sodomite scandal. The annunciation and birth of Samson to Manoah and his wife, old and hitherto barren, recall the annunciation to Abraham and Sarah, and the birth of Isaac in Gen. 21. The faithful willingness of Abraham to sacrifice Isaac in Gen. 22 is continued in the faithful willingness of Jephthah to sacrifice his daughter. 1 The birth of a son to Elkanah's favourite wife, Hannah, long afflicted with barrenness, takes up the birth of a son, Joseph, to Rachel, long afflicted with barrenness (Gen. 29—30): indeed Hannah's prayer, 'O Lord . . . look upon the affliction of thy maidservant', echoes the words of Leah at the birth of her first-born, 'Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction' (Gen. 29.32). As Rachel steals her father's teraphim in Gen. 31, so do the Danites steal Micah's. Gideon defeats Zebah and Zalmunna by Penuel and Succoth, where Jacob came in Gen. 32—33. The violence at Shechem in the days of Abimelech recalls the violence at Shechem with Levi and Simeon in Gen. 34: and Gideon took the golden earrings and made an idol of them at Ophrah, like the foreign gods and earrings which Jacob put away at Shechem in Gen. 35. That is a lot of correspondences to be accidental, and it is cause for remark that they begin where the Joshua correspondences left off at Gen. 17, and stop where the Joseph saga begins at Gen. 37; but unlike the Joshua series they are not comprehensive, and they are not in order. Perhaps, as I have suggested, the order problem is not insoluble: it may have been different in D's day. The missing chapters in the series from Gen. 22—28 may be accounted for by less obvious correspondences: it is hard to be sure what a correspondence is. In Gen. 24 Abraham takes the greatest pains to secure a wife for Isaac from his own kin: whereas Samson's predilection for Philistine women led him to disaster. Here is a theme to appeal to any postexilic preacher, not least the authors of Deut. 7.3 and Josh. 23.12 f. Blind Isaac is deceived by his wife, taking Jacob for long-haired Esau: Samson is deceived by his wife, loses his long hair and is blinded. The successes of Judg. 1—2 centre on the capture of Bethel, formerly Luz, and the angel of the Lord then goes up to Bochim, another name for Bethel: so perhaps we have a haphfarah for Jacob's 1

cf. Ps.-Philo, Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, 40.2, where Jephthah's daughter replies to her father, 'And who is there who will grieve to die, beholding the people freed? Or do you forget what befell in the days of our fathers, when father set son for a burnt offering, and he did not gainsay him, but consented to him with joy, and he who was offered was willing, and he who offered rejoicing?'—cited by G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition in Judaism (Leiden 1961), p. 199.

coming to Bethel in Gen. 28. Deborah's victory over Sisera might stand against her namesake Deborah, whose death comes in Gen. 35. These four suggestions are by no means so impressive as the parallels to the eight earlier stories. If they are right, there is a comprehensive series, a correspondence for every major incident in Judges/ 1 Sam. 1—2 on the one side, and Gen. 18—35 on the other—twelve tales for the twelve tribes descended from the twelve sons of Jacob. If they are not right, and if the order of Judges is D's order and not the Redactors', then the principal correspondences remain noticeable, even if at a short distance. I do not wish to be misunderstood as claiming what is demonstrably impossible: that the D-historians were able so to contrive matters that a detailed promise-and-fulfilment relationship could be obtained for every week of the year. Clearly this could not be so: with longestablished sagas like the Joseph story, or the Saul and David traditions, and still more with the royal annals, there could be no guarantee of a detailed parallel, and for many weeks there is none. Often a general parallel would have to suffice. It is like the epistles and gospels in the Book of Common Prayer: sometimes the preacher can see that they are arranged to follow the same theme, sometimes not; sometimes he wonders. Where D's material was of a more legendary nature, in the early sections, and where the order of the stories was unimportant, detailed correspondence was easier, within the limits of what tradition provided. There is also a good number of correspondences with the second half of the year, the Exodus and Wanderings stories, though here our uncertainties multiply. In Deut. 1—4 and 9—10 there are rehearsals of some of the principal events following the Exodus. It is clear that these are not the complete tradition known to D, because there are also incidental references to events not included in these rehearsals, such as the leprosy of Miriam (24.9) or the prophecies of Balaam (23.4). In general the material agrees with the JE matter in Exodus/Numbers, though not always: Moses is barred from entering the land at Kadesh according to Deut. 1.37, at Meribah according to Num. 20.12. There are clearly some differences in order, however, from the redacted version in our Torah, e.g. Moses' call of the Seventy after Horeb(-Sinai) in Deut. 1.6 ff., instead of before, in Exod. 18: and here we are best served by the order of events given in the historical psalms, especially Ps. 106, which is familiar with JE traditions also,1 and must be close to contemporary with D. The 1

cf. especially .16-18 on Dathan and Abiram, Deut. 11.6; .44 ff. refer to God's relenting after the exile: 'he caused them to be pitied by all those who held them captive'.

putting together of these sources enables us to reconstruct a tentative order f o r the second half of the tradition. 1 T h e most significant feature of such a reconstruction is t h a t it displays the possibility of the festal celebration of b o t h the cardinal Exodus story, as implied in Pss. 105—106, a n d the Davidic A r k C o v e n a n t story, as implied in Ps. 132. T h e Deuteronomists inherited a Diteuch, a tradition of patriarchal narratives comprising some forty 2 chapters of JE material f r o m Genesis, a n d a tradition of Egypt-Desert narratives comprising some twenty chapters in o u r Exodus a n d ten in o u r N u m b e r s . To this slightly uneven balance they a d d e d their own corpus of laws a n d homiletic material, f o r m i n g a Triteuch, a Genesis followed by an E x o d u s - N u m b e r s a n d a D e u t e r o n o m y . T h e t w o historical psalms 105-106 cover the tradit i o n i n t w o halves, the one f r o m A b r a h a m t o the Exodus, the other 1

See Table IV at the end of the chapter. The Joshua and Judges sections reproduce the parallels on which I have already commented. I have set the Joseph story against the 1 Sam. story, since it comes next; there is some general similarity in that Joseph and David are both young men destined by Yahweh to rule and deliver Israel, but persecuted by their own kin. I have put the beginning of Exodus against 1 Sam. 31 because the latter is the opening of the story in 1 Chron., and falls against Exod. 1 ff. in the Chronicler's Year (Table II). From Deut. 9—10 we can tell that the Deuteronomic order was: Moses' first ascent of Horeb (32), the Golden Calf (33), the second ascent with the making of the ark and the separation of the Levites (34). From Deut. 1—4 we know that this was followed by the Call of the Seventy (35), the Spies (36), the Embassies and Battles with Sihon and Og (37), Joshua's Charge (39), and Phinehas at Baal-peor (40). Ps. 106 gives the order: Red Sea and Song (28), Manna and Quails (29), Dathan and Abiram (31), the Golden Calf (33), the Spies (36), Phinehas and Baal-peor (40) and Meribah (41). I have further inserted Massah (Deut. 9.22) after the Manna story in the Exodus order (30); with an alternative of Miriam (Deut. 24.9) in the same position following the Numbers order. Balaam seemed proper at (38), after Sihon and Og and before Joshua's charge and Phinehas, as in Numbers. The Deuteronomy divisions are the sidrdt, faute de mieux. It should be noted that the events in the right-hand column do in logic fall into units of about three chapters: the Loss and Recovery of the Ark (1 Sam. 4—6), the Request for a King (1 Sam. 7—9), the Anointing and Success of Saul (1 Sam. 10—12), Saul's Disobedience (1 Sam. 13—15), the Rise of David (1 Sam. 16—18), etc. It is especially noticeable how the Elijah saga falls into units of more than one chapter (story): the great drought ties together Elijah's flight to Zarephath (1 Kings 17) with the contest at Carmel (1 Kings 18); the theophany at Horeb (1 Kings 19) includes the charge to anoint a Syrian king, and is followed by the wars with Ben-hadad (1 Kings 20); the murder of Naboth (1 Kings 21) is requited by the death of Ahab (1 Kings 22). The divisions in the table are not, as a whole, arbitrary, but follow the grain of the tale. 2 1 have followed the analysis given in Eissfeldt, op. cit., pp. 194, 199-201, 204.

from the Red Sea to the Entry with an epilogue on more recent times; and Ps. 81, which we have seen to be associated with the autumn festival,1 also begins its celebration with the Exodus. It is therefore an encouragement to note that the divisions we have made of the Abraham and Jacob stories (with their parallels in Joshua and Judges) carry us through to Week 17, and a commonsense division of the Joseph story would take us to the half-year, enabling the Egypt saga to begin at the beginning of Tishri, with the Exodus itself at the Festival. The remainder of the year can then be divided between the Desert stories and Deuteronomy in the way shown in Table IV. When we turn to the Histories, we have already noted that Josh. 5—6 would fall at Passover, and that it is still the Passover reading: what about Tabernacles? Well, there are 136 of our chapters in the D-Histories, so that if they were divided evenly round the year there would be rather under three chapters per sabbath, and the half-year mark would be at 2 Sam. 3, the 68th chapter in the series; and the Tabernacles haphfarah would fall shortly after that. Now, of all the stories in the Histories, the two which would appeal to us as the most likely readings for Tabernacles are 2 Sam. 6, the Induction of the Ark into Jerusalem, and 2 Sam. 7, Yahweh's covenant with David. These chapters have long been suspected of being liturgical texts.2 2 Sam. 6 is expanded by the Chronicler into a great occasion of music and psalmody, including a considerable citation of Pss. 105—106. It is closely connected with Ps. 132, which is a processional psalm celebrating first the bringing of the ark from the fields of Jearim and then the Davidic covenant from the next chapter. Further, as will be seen from Table IV, many of the Histories stories fall into natural units of about three chapters. It is difficult not to feel that this is an important confirmation of the whole lectionary theory; for only a lectionary hypothesis would explain the occurrence of an island of liturgical text in a sea of history. All the Histories are haphfardt, and 2 Sam. 6—7 was the haphfarah for Tabernacles. The link between the Exodus and the 2 Sam. passage is made in the last verses of Moses' Song at the Red Sea: 'Thou wilt bring them in, and plant them on thy own mountain, the place, O Lord, which thou hast made for thy abode, the sanctuary, O Lord, which thy hands have established. The Lord will reign for ever and ever.'3 1

See above, pp. 26 f. A. Bentzen, "The Cultic Use of the Story of the Ark', JBL (1948), pp. 37 ff.; J. R. Porter, 'The Interpretation of H Sam. 6 . . . ' , JTS (1954), pp. 161 ff.; E. W. Nicholson, Exodus and Sinai in History and Tradition (Oxford 1973). » Exod. 15.17 f.

2

For the rest, some of the correspondences fall in the parallel week, some shortly apart. Israel's revolts from Moses (units 29-30) go with Israel's revolt from David (29-30); Moses' ascent of Horeb (32) is at some distance from Elijah's (40), as is Aaron's Calf (33) from Jeroboam's (37). Moses' making of the ark, and perhaps the tent (34)1 is near Solomon's making of the Temple (35); Balaam's 'The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak' (38) is not far from Micaiah's similar protestation (41); Phinehas' zeal for the Lord (40) is near Elijah's (39). The last pair are still set together in the present cycle, at Week 41. Moses begins to hand over to Joshua at Deut. 1 (42), as Elijah hands over to Elisha, and the latter is as single-minded a prophet of Yahweh as Moses requires in 43—45. The extirpation of false religion commanded in 46 is practised by Jehu (46). The first cursing chapter, Deut. 28, with its threat of exile for faithless Israel (48), is answered by the defeat and exile of the northern kingdom (48); the promise of grace to penitent Israel (49), by the successes of Hezekiah (49); the further wave of threats in Moses' Song in Deut. 32 (51),2 by the fall of Judah in (51). I have tried not to force either the divisions or the parallelism of the stories, and the reader must judge how natural they are. But It would seem to me that regardless of the detail of the reconstruction we have abundant evidence of a kind of running echo between the two bodies of tradition which would justify the general theological account which I have given above. The lectionary hypothesis accounts for the emergence and homiletic nature of the D-Histories more plausibly than any theory at present current: it explains why the D-corpus was put together when it was, why it assumes traditions about the Patriarchs, what the relationship of Deuteronomy was to these received traditions, and of the Triteuch to the historical narrative following, and why there are whole series of stories closely similar between the two narratives, some of them being in a comprehensive order. The genius of von Rad showed the liturgical origins of Deuteronomy: it is not a long step to the liturgical setting in life of the whole Deuteronomic work. 1

2

Moses makes the ark and the two tables himself in Deut. 10.3; and the making of the ark is assumed in the (L)J account from the same point (Num. 10.33-6). The tent is implied as a covering for the ark, and is referred to in Num. 11 and 12. Deut. 32 is usually thought not to have been a part of the D-work, but to have been added shortly afterwards, cf. von Rad, Deuteronomy, p. 11, Eissfeldt, op. cit., pp. 226 f., Fohrer, IOT, pp. 189 f. The need for a 'prophecy' of the fall of Judah in the Law would provide an obvious motive for the addition of the chapter.

(iii) The Redaction of the Law and the Chroniclers Such, then, was the system in outline which was elaborated to provide for the sabbath worship of the Jews in the D-community in Babylon in the sixth century, and which became established in Palestine with the Return. We must now turn to the complication of the fourth century, when the received form of the Law was considerably modified. Somewhere about 400 B.C.—397 is the date most usually given— Ezra brought a second contingent of Jews from Babylonia, bringing with them a version of the Law which had been developed independently of the D-tradition. Neh. 8.13-18 testifies the shock in both communities, and the acceptance of the newcomers' more developed calendar: in the following generation was accomplished the task of interleaving the P and H traditions into the established D-Torah— the work of the Pentateuchal Redactors. What the Redactors did in effect was to intrude a new middle into the D-Torah. D's Torah was a Triteuch. His Genesis was about 80 per cent of our Genesis; his Deuteronomy was our Deuteronomy less a few short passages at the end; his Exodus-Desert story was about half of our Exodus with about a quarter of our Numbers. Into this Triteuch, about 105 chapters in all, the Redactors inserted a further 80-odd chapters, nearly doubling the total material: the whole book of Leviticus, all the Tabernacle material in Exodus, most of our Numbers, and assorted other matter. Now the most important thing about this development from a lectionary point of view is that the balance of the Torah is entirely changed. TTie new material nearly all goes into the middle of the year, most of it between Weeks 33 and 42 of my old year: Genesis and Exodus are squeezed. In my hypothetical reconstruction, which is merely a reflection of Eissfeldt's proportions, Genesis had 25 weeks; today it has twelve sidrdt. The effect on a system of balanced sidrdt and haphfardt is to throw the whole thing out of gear. Isaac's annunciation now comes six weeks before Samson's; Jacob's children are born a month before Elkanah's. This may be seen in the diagram opposite. In this situation three responses were possible: (1) the community could shoulder the inconvenience, and the preacher could introduce his sermon, 'You will remember . . . ' , (2) the haphfardt in the first part of the year could be squeezed, as Genesis had been, and as shown in the right-hand column—this would mean an imbalance, with short lessons in the middle of the year and long ones at the beginning, but at least the parallels would be maintained—or (3) the histories could be rewritten so as to even out the imbalance, and to

Hypothetical D-Torah (Table IV)

Hypothetical D-Histories (Table IV)

Sidrdt (Table I)

Reconstructed Haphfardt (Table VI)

1st NisanJoshua (3)

Josh. 5-6 Joshua (6)

Passover

Judges (5) Genesis (12)

Judges (10) Genesis (25)

1 Samuel (10)

Exodus (11)

1 Samuel (10)

2 Samuel (8) Leviticus (3)

1st TishriTabernacles

Exod. 10—12

2 Sam. 6 f f . 2 Samuel (8)

Lev. 21—24

1 Kings 6—8

Leviticus (5)

Exodus-

1 Kings (16)

(16) Numbers Numbers (10) 1 Kings (9)

Deuteronomy (10) 2 Kings (10)

Deuteronomy (11) 2 Kings (11)

assimilate the theology of the D-histories to the full Law. In fact, both of the latter two projects were tried, and the second of the three finally triumphed. I have referred before to the Chronicler's work as a series of haphfardt in parallel to our Torah, and to the fact that such a scheme would fit an annual cycle. I am concerned here with the way in which he solves the problem created by the new proportions of the Torah. 1 Essentially this is a draconian solution: he simply leaves out all the early part of the story, and starts from 1 Sam. 31, the death of Saul, which he sets alongside Exod. 1, the oppression in Egypt (see Table II, pp. 70-2). This is satisfactory to him because his hero is David, and David always had been in some sense the successor of Moses, the true shepherd of Israel: so the Philistine oppression from which David delivered the people was in line with the Egyptian oppression from which Moses delivered the people— and belonged alongside it in my reconstruction of the D-year. The much shorter Genesis period, now only twelve weeks, the Chronicler divides in two. Joshua had been haphfarah to the first six, and he retains this arrangement, because Joshua is a vital figure in respect of later history. What Joshua had achieved in the Entry to the Land, Jeshua ben-Jozadak and the others had achieved at the Return. The Chronicler therefore prefixes to his work a six-week third lesson, a Book of Jeshua, what we call Ezra-Nehemiah, which divides into six straightforward units, each in parallel with the Abraham-Joshua sagas. For the remaining six weeks, he covers the Heilsgeschichte from Adam to the Patriarchs in the only way possible—in a Genealogical history. The establishment of the Twelve Tribes can thus be demonstrated, and their proliferation down subsequent centuries. The major difficulties are thus obviated. It is true that the Exodus story is also compressed, but then the Chronicler had no wish to include the Bathsheba-Absalom story that would run parallel to it: so the six sidrdt that carry the Moses tradition down to Exod. 24 can be paralleled with the tales of David's triumph. Thereafter the enormous increase in cultic matter, for the rest of Exodus and half Leviticus, can be met by an enormous amplification of the Temple story. As God first gives Moses the pattern of the Tabernacle, and then Moses builds it, so now David gives Solomon the pattern of the Temple, and Solomon builds it. For the remainder the Chronicler simply borrows the kings forward, amplifying as he goes. Jeroboam institutes the worship of he-goats now, so as to fit the Lev. 17 sidra. 1

There is an account of the Chronicler's work in MLM, ch. 10.

Asa's career becomes a living lesson in the rewards of obedience and the punishment of apostasy, to fit the double promise of Lev. 26. Zechariah is stoned like the faithful spies of Num. 14; and so on. This means rather short commons for Deuteronomy, but Hezekiah is made to stretch, and the same final Exile/Restoration contrast can be drawn. The rewriting is no mean achievement. Why, then, has the Chronicler not succeeded in ousting D from the place of honour in the N'bhVtm, and been forced with shame to take the lowest place among the Writings? Do we not all know? His work has two patent faults, one of omission, one of commission. He is, on the positive side, too didactic; he is boring; no one wants to plough through his beautiful tables of names, or his inevitable sermons. On the negative side, his midrash lacks the freshness and genius of D. Theological considerations may make Elijah's altar on Carmel a scandal, and Elijah and Elisha, as northern prophets, an irrelevance; but they are gems in the religious treasury of mankind, pearls which the sdph'rtm of the third century had more sense than to tread underfoot. Unless the Chronicler's work had risen to regular use in his own time, it would not have survived; if it had risen to such for a century, we should not have Samuel-Kings.

(iv) The Redaction of the Law and the Histories But if the great stories of Samuel and Saul and Bathsheba and Elijah were to be used in the liturgy, how much better if they could be adjusted to the amplified Torah! The adjustments necessary may be seen from the right-hand column of the diagram on p. 127. Gen. 1—17, which occupied six weeks in parallel with Joshua in our hypothetical D-year, now comprises three sidrdt; Gen. 18—36 with its Judges second reading, once ten or eleven sections, is now five sidrdt; and so on. A squeezing of the early Histories readings into half the number of weeks, in line with the squeezing of Genesis from twenty-five to twelve sidrdt, however, is only part of the problem. For a crucial feature of the D-cycle as we supposed it was the provision of 2 Sam. 6—7 as the second lesson for Tabernacles; and the compression of the Joshua and Judges material into eight weeks will inevitably bring the Ark and Davidic Covenant much earlier in the year. It is difficult to think that any revision of the cycle could be acceptable which ignored the theme of the central feast in the year. The telescoping process which I have described would result in the cycle reaching 1 Kings by about the turn of the half-year; and this suggests a happy possibility. The Davidic planning of the Temple was fulfilled in the building of the house by Solomon at a convenient

interval later; and since Solomon consecrated the Temple 'at the feast in the month Ethanim, which is the seventh month', this is a highly suitable haphfarah. The Temple building is described in 1 Kings 6 and its consecration in 1 Kings 8. It is at this point that we leave the realm of speculation and have some evidence. 1 Kings 8.2-21 is the reading for the second day of Tabernacles in the traditional cycle, and 1 Kings 8.54-66 for the eighth day. Both of these readings go back to Baraitas in the Talmud, 1 which adds for the ninth day Solomon's blessing, 1 Kings 8.22 ff. The association with Tabernacles is thus ancient and comprehensive. For the rest, the principal changes which were made in the redaction of the Histories were the expansion of Joshua with the details of the distribution of the land, and the re-ordering of the stories in Judges, with some editing. The first five chapters of Joshua, as we have seen, lead up to the celebration of Passover and Unleavened Bread at 5.10 ff.: there would now be a convenient amount of material to continue reading the book through the remainder of the feast.2 The present ordering of Judges brings together the different stories of Gideon and Jerubbaal, and of Samson, so that there is no great difficulty in reading them in five weeks: an introduction culminating in Deborah and Barak (1—5); Gideon and his son Abimelech (6—9); Jephthah, etc. (10—12); Samson (13—16); and the scandals at Dan and Gibeah (17—21). 1 and 2 Samuel could then be read in ten and eight weeks respectively, as they were in the hypothetical D-year, retaining the natural divisions in the story: the young Samuel in 1 Sam. 1—3, the loss and recovery of the ark in 1 Sam. 4—7.2, etc. David enters the story at about the same point as Moses, and for thirteen weeks their sagas run alongside each other; Solomon, as we have just seen, will now fall in Tishri, coinciding with the celebration of the Temple at Tabernacles. The disobedience of Jeroboam and his successors remains alongside the rebellions of the desert, now in Numbers; and we have the complement to the earlier telescoping of Joshua and Judges in that the 1 Kings stories can be taken at a rather more leisurely pace. For what it is worth, one of the traditional sabbath haphfardt can be synchronized with its sidra. 1 Kings 18.46—19.21 is set opposite sidra 41, Phinehas, in the traditional use; though it is likely to have belonged originally rather with sidra 40, as the parallel is between the zeal of Elijah and the zeal of Phinehas, and the latter tale is told at the end of sidra 40. This juxtaposition can be retained. 2 Kings 1 2

b Meg. 31a. See Table VI, p. 156. The use of Unleavened Bread for readings is normal in Jewish tradition, see p. 67.

will then lie alongside Deuteronomy, as I suggested for the D-year, the same parallels applying. Can any evidence be supplied to support so large a construction? Certainly the six haphfardt from the traditional cycle which coincide, two from Joshua and four from 1 Kings, cannot be considered an adequate foundation; for, as a glance at Table I will show, there are many other haphfardt taken from the Histories which do not coincide. What we need is evidence from the period between the editing of the Histories, in the fourth and perhaps third centuries B.C., and the second century A.D., when the present eclectic series is likely to have begun to form; and the place to look must be the Writings. For the lectionary theory which I am inviting my readers to consider is not a frail attempt to undergird a corner of biblical literature. It is an attempt to interpret the whole of Scripture as liturgical, in origin and in use. Our century's understanding of the Bible as documents, often written by the learned for the learned, to be kept in synagogue or church chests, has been unhappily coloured by the stories of Josiah's book and Jeremiah's scroll, and has in consequence been largely misconceived. Scripture was to the rabbis primarily miqra', that which was read out. Traditions were written down normally only after they had been recited for years—in earlier times, for centuries. The only difference that the writing made was that the recital (miqra') became a reading (miqra'). If the tradition stopped being celebrated it would be lost, as our earlier versions of the Torah have been lost: we have no L-, J-, E-, D-, or P-version of the Law, only R. Supersession meant extinction. Traditions became Scripture by having been told, then recited, at worship, and they remained Scripture by continuing to be read out at worship. The only partial exception to these generalizations I take to be the N.T. epistles, in so far as they have no pre-history of recital; but I shall argue in ch. 8 that they too have a continuous history of liturgical use, once they were received by the churches. It so happens that the book which tells us most clearly what was the accepted pattern of reading the Histories in the late B.C. period is 1 Maccabees. The correspondences between 1 Maccabees on the one side, and the Torah and Histories on the other, are so numerous, so comprehensive and so evenly-spaced, as to leave no doubt of their lectionary origins; and the form of the book, and our greater knowledge of the later period, enable us to see with increasing clarity the setting in life from which it springs. Some of the books that we have been considering—the Law, the Histories, Isaiah, etc.—were the serial readings for a whole year; others, the individual Minor Prophets, were read over a few weeks each, about a chapter a

sabbath. Now let us consider the situation in the Maccabaean Temple, or in the synagogue within the precincts, as the sacred traditions are read and expounded week by week in presence of the Hasmonean king-priest. The preacher, spurred by the accounts of God's mighty deeds of old, wishes to declare that these mercies have continued in his own generation. What God did classically, God has continued to do. On the other hand, it might be excessive to describe a Maccabaean battle in the sermon every sabbath in the year, and other themes are suggested by other parts of the readings. The passages which most forcefully evoke the feeling of continuity are the stories of David and Jonathan fighting with small armies against the oppressive hosts of the Philistines; of David's capture of Jerusalem and establishing of worship there. We know that the Maccabaean preacher thought like this because he has left plentiful echoes of the Saul-Jonathan-David saga scattered through his book, substantially in order; and it is these that are our clue to the division of the Histories which prevailed in the church of St Luke.

(v) The Use of the Histories Cycle in 1 Maccabees I shall suggest in ch. 7 a process by which the book of Daniel came to be read in the opening weeks of the year, its final vision being dated on 24th Nisan (Dan. 10.4); the weeks between Passover and Pentecost came to be filled, at about the same period, by the book of Tobit. 1 After Pentecost the last chapters of Genesis were read, 1

The book of Tobit follows the pattern of the stories of Genesis in order, and would make a suitable series of readings between Passover and Pentecost, a feast celebrated in the text (Tobit 2.1). At 3.7 Sarah the daughter of Raguel is reproached by her father's maids (cf. Gen. 16); at 3.15 she is her father's only child, and he has no child to be his heir (cf. Gen. 15, sidra 3). At 4.1 ff. Tobit calls his son before he dies, and bids him bury him, and his mother beside him in the same grave; first of all (4.12) he is to take a wife from among the descendants of his fathers, and not to marry a foreign woman, remembering Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 23, 24). They were blessed in their posterity: but the stress in the chapter is on giving, in charity, of one's bread to the hungry (like Abraham to Hagar, whose son, however, married an Egyptian, Gen. 21, sidra 4). In 5, Tobit sends Tobias to the Tigris accompanied by the angel Raphael, confident that God will prosper his way and send his angel to attend him, as Abraham sent Eleazar to Aram-Naharaim in Gen. 24 (sidra 5). The same story has echoes in Tobit 6, where Raguel in Ecbatana is Tobias' kinsman (.10) with a daughter who is a fair damsel (.12), for whom Tobias comes to yearn deeply (.17). Raguel kisses Tobias welcome, but the young man will not eat till his daughter is engaged to him (7.6, 11), which is then done. Raguel grieves to hear that Tobit has become blind (.7, like Isaac in Gen. 27, sidra 6), and his wife kills a ram and serves large portions of the meat. In 7.16—8.21 Raguel has his wife prepare the bridal chamber, where the

and it is here that the court preacher takes his opportunity. The Maccabees had been leaders of Israel like Jacob's sons, and Judas had been the first leader, just as Judah had been promised the hegemony by Jacob. We have a circumstantial account of the actual beginning of the war in 2 Macc. 3—7, differing from 1 Macc.; and it would be easy to think that the latter has styled Mattathias' tale in 1 Macc. 2 after the pattern of 'our father Phinehas'—indeed, the hint is broadly dropped at 2.26, 'Thus he burned with zeal for the law, as Phinehas did against Zimri the son of Salu'. But in the second part of the chapter the author takes a new model, in Jacob's blessing in Gen. 49. Mattathias blesses his sons before his death, like Jacob; he is gathered to his fathers (2.69), like Jacob; his sons bury him in the sepulchre of his fathers, like Jacob; and all Israel makes lamentation for him, like Jacob. Judas then goes out to battle, and we read, 'He was like a lion in his deeds, and as a lion's whelp, roaring for prey' (3.4)—cf. Gen. 49.9, 'Judah is a lion's whelp; from the prey, my son, thou art gone up. He stooped down, he couched as a l i o n . . . ' With 1 Macc. 3 the story of the campaigns begins, and with them the reminiscences of 1 Sam.: 3.12 3.16

'And they took their spoils, and Judas took the sword of Apollonius, and therewith he fought all his days'—compare David and Goliath's sword (1 Sam. 17.51, 21.9). 'And he came near to the going up of Beth-horon, and Judas went forth to meet him with a small company'—cf. the company of the Philistines that turned from Michmash toward Beth-horon, one of the three opposed by Saul and Jonathan and six hundred men (1 Sam. 13.15-18).

3.18

'And Judas said, It is an easy thing for many to be shut up in the hands of few; and with heaven it is all one, to save by

newly wed couple sleep (like Jacob and his bride, but Tobias prays and exorcizes the demon), and he then gives a fortnight's wedding feast and half his property in dowry (reminiscent of Laban in Gen. 29, sidra 7, but much more generous, and Tobias gets the right wife too). In 9—10 Tobias bids farewell to his father-in-law, and sets off for home laden with his slaves and cattle (like Jacob in Gen. 31—33, sidrdt 7-8). In 11—12 Tobit and Anna receive their son home, and Tobit's blindness is cured, so that he sees his son in safety (more like Jacob and Joseph now, sidrdt 9-11); they wish to give Raphael half of the money (cf. Gen. 42), but he reveals that all has been under God's providence. In 13—14 Tobit writes a prayer of thanksgiving, and on his deathbed blesses his sons and grandsons, foretelling their return to Jerusalem after a period in exile; he bids Tobias bury him, which he duly does (cf. Gen. 49—50). The movement of the story is apparent. It would have made a highly attractive and popular series of sermons alongside the whole of Genesis, or, with competition, from Passover to Pentecost.

3.24 f.

3.46

many or by few'—cf. Jonathan's almost identical words before the battle of Michmash (1 Sam. 14.6). "The residue fled into the land of Philistia: and the fear of Judas and his brethren, and the dread of them began to fall upon the nations'—cf. the trembling and flight of the Philistines (1 Sam. 14.15, 22). The Maccabees 'gathered themselves together and came to Mizpah . . . for in Mizpah there was a place of prayer aforetime in Israel'—that is, in the days of Samuel, who made Saul king there (1 Sam. 10.17).

4.6

'Judas appeared . . . with three thousand men: howbeit they had not armour nor swords'—like Saul and Jonathan's army that had neither sword nor spear (1 Sam. 13.19 ff.).

4.9

Judas says, 'Remember how our fathers were saved in the Red Sea, when Pharaoh pursued them with a host' (Exod. 14).

4.17

Judas 'said to the people, Be not greedy of the spoils . . . but stand ye now against our enemies and fight against them, and afterwards take the spoils with boldness'—like Saul at Michmash (1 Sam. 14.24).

4.24

After victory 'they returned home and sang a song of thanksgiving, and gave praise unto heaven', as in Exod. 15 after the crossing of the Red Sea, and 1 Sam. 18 after the death of Goliath.

4.30

Judas prays, 'Blessed art thou, O Saviour of Israel, who didst quell the onset of the mighty man by the hand of thy servant David, and didst deliver the army of the Philistines into the hands of Jonathan the son of Saul and his armour-bearer' (1 Sam. 17; 14.13 ff.).

4.32

Judas continues, 'Cause the boldness of their strength to melt away, and let them quake at their destruction'—as the Philistines trembled and melted away in 1 Sam. 14.15 f.

5.2

'They took counsel to destroy the race of Jacob that was in the midst of them, and they began to slay and destroy'—like Pharaoh in Exod. 1—2.

5.6, 10 ff. The Israelites in Gilead 'sent letters unto Judas . . . saying, The Gentiles that are round about us are gathered together against us to destroy us . . . and Timotheus (the Ammonite) is the leader of their host'—as the men of Jabesh-gilead sent letters to Saul to deliver them from Nahash the Ammonite (1 Sam. 11.1^1). 5.24-7

Judas and Jonathan cross the Jordan, and are told, 'Tomorrow

they have appointed to encamp against the strongholds and to take them'—like Nahash and the Jabeshites (1 Sam. 11.9 f.). Judas goes forth to battle 'in three companies'—as Saul did against Nahash (1 Sam. 11.11).

5.33 6.43

During the battle with the elephants, 'Eleazar who was called Avaran' acts as the champion of Israel and is killed—like Eleazar, one of David's Three, who 'defied the Philistines that were gathered together, and the men of Israel went away', when David was 'at the cave of Adullam' (2 Sam. 23.9 f., 13; 1 Sam. 22).

7.33 ff.

Nicanor swears to the priests on Mount Sion 'in a rage, Except Judas and his army be now delivered into my hands, I will burn up this house'—somewhat as Saul destroyed the priests at Nob when David escaped him (1 Sam. 22.11-19).

9.6 f.

Judas' army 'feared exceedingly, and many slipped away out of the army'—cf. the panic before Gilboa (1 Sam. 28.5).

9.11

Bacchides' army advances, 'and the slingers and the archers went before the host'—cf. the archers who vexed Saul at Gilboa (1 Sam. 31.3).

9.18 f.

'Judas fell and the rest fled. And Jonathan and Simon took Judas their brother and buried him'—so Saul fell at Gilboa and the men of Israel fled: and the men of Jabesh came and buried Saul (1 Sam. 31).

9.20

'All Israel made great lamentation for (Judas), and mourned many days, and said, How is the mighty fallen, the saviour of Israel'—as David did for Saul and Jonathan, and echoing David's words (2 Sam. 1.19 ff.).

9.30

Judas' friends say to Jonathan, 'Now therefore we have chosen thee this day to be our prince and leader in his stead'—as the men of Judah came and anointed David king in place of Saul (2 Sam. 2.4).

9.58

ff.

Lawless men betray Jonathan's whereabouts to Bacchides, who 'came with a great host' to take him by night; but Jonathan escapes into the wilderness—as David did from Saul (1 Sam. 23.19; 24).

10.7

ff.

'Jonathan came to Jerusalem... and began to build and renew the. city', and 'captured the strongholds'—as David captured Jerusalem, and built the city of David (2 Sam. 5.7, 9).

10.21

'Jonathan put on the holy garments . . . at the feast of Tabernacles'—that is, the high-priestly garments described in Exod. 28, and put on by Aaron on 1st Tishri in Exod. 40.

10.25, 39-44

King Demetrius writes giving certain land 'as a gift to the sanctuary that is at Jerusalem, for the expenses that befit the sanctuary. And I give every year fifteen thousand shekels of silver'—cf. the annual contribution of sh'qalim ordained for the expenses of the sanctuary in Exod. 30.11 ff.

10.71 ff. Apollonius challenges Jonathan, 'Come down to us into the plain, and there let us try the matter together'—as Abner challenged Joab (2 Sam. 2.12 ff.). 11.9 f.

Ptolemy sends to Demetrius, 'Come, let us make a covenant with one another, and I will give thee my daughter whom Alexander h a t h . . . for I have repented that I gave my daughter unto him'—so did Saul give Michal to David, and then to Paltiel, but David regained her from Ishbaal (2 Sam. 3.12 ff.).

11.17

Zabdiel 'took off Alexander's head, and sent it to Ptolemy'— as Rechab and Baanah took off Ishbaal's head, and brought it to David (2 Sam. 4.7 ff).

11.20-52

Jonathan besieges and captures the citadel of Jerusalem—as David took Jebus (2 Sam. 5.4-8).

11.58

Antiochus sends Jonathan golden vessels—cf. Toi, king of Hamath, who sent David vessels of silver and vessels of gold (2 Sam. 8.10).

11.60-2

Jonathan makes the cities of Syria his confederates, and 'passed through the country as far as Damascus', taking the sons of the princes of Gaza for hostages—somewhat more grandly, David conquered Syria and garrisoned Damascus, and received Joram the Syrian prince to sue for peace (2 Sam. 8).

12.1-2

Jonathan sends embassies to Rome, Sparta, etc.—cf. David's embassy to Hanun king of Ammon (2 Sam. 10.1 ff.).

13.11, 27-8

Simon Maccabaeus sends Jonathan son of Absalom to take Joppa, and builds pillars as a monument to his brother—cf. Absalom, David's son, who built a pillar for himself (2 Sam. 13 ff.; 18.18).

14.4-15

"The land had rest all the days of Simon . . . he provided victuals for the cities . . . He made peace in the land . . . and they sat each man under his vine and his fig tree . . . He glorified the sanctuary, and the vessels of the Temple he multiplied'—like Solomon (1 Kings 4 ff.).

15.32

'Athenobius the king's friend came to Jerusalem; and he saw the glory of Simon, and the cupboard of gold and silver vessels, and his great attendance, and he was amazed'—like the Queen of Sheba, and other visitors (1 Kings 4.34; 10).

16.2

Simon's last words to his sons, 'I and my brethren . . . have fought the battles of Israel from our youth . . . but now I am o l d . . . be ye instead of me'—cf. David's last words to Solomon in 1 Kings 2.1-4.

16.16

Ptolemy invites Simon to a banquet and murders him 'when he had drunk freely'—as Absalom murdered Amnon (2 Sam. 13.28): for the scene (esp. 2 Sam. 13.29) cf. 1 Kings 1.49, Adonijah's banquet.

I have cited more than thirty parallels between 1 Macc. and the Samuel-Kings story, and half a dozen with Gen. 49-Exodus. The intentional drawing of such parallels is not in question: such an activity would be generally conceded, and imputed to pious colouring ( of a historical book, written for court circles. Two things make such a construction unlikely: (1) the volume of the correspondences, and (2) the visible movement of the story. For the first, it is not that the parallels have occurred as the story suggested them. They have been constantly and deliberately worked in. Athenobius' visit, Jonathan's embassies, Simon's pillar, are not integral to the story: they just match up with the Queen of Sheba, etc. For the second, the pious colouring view would be satisfying if the correspondences came in random order: for a literary author would not be in any way guided by the advance of the David saga. But our list, while not in detailed series—what repetition of history could be as exact as that?—shows an unmistakable progress from the beginning of Saul and Jonathan's campaigns against the Ammonites and Philistines to the succession of Solomon. The Ammonite campaign of 1 Sam. 11 is taken out of order, as are a number of details; but the central progress of the story is identical—battles against heavy odds, the death of, and lament for, Saul and Jonathan/Judas, the capture of Jerusalem, the establishment of peace, the succession of Solomon/Simon. Into this central progress many minor details are slotted to fall exactly in series: and this invites us to set the chapters of 1 Macc. against an even division of Samuel, and against the sidrdt. The suggestion of the text is that we put 1 Macc. 2 against the end of Genesis, and 1 Macc. 3 against 1 Sam. 13—15; and this yields a table such as Table V on p. 140, with nine of the Maccabee chapters drawing in references from the actual haphfarah, and the three pairs of Torah references sited to fit exactly. The conclusion seems plain: 1 Macc. was a series of sixteen stories first told and then read as third lessons for the weeks between Pentecost and New Year. This brief study has yielded results which are crucial for the study of Luke. First, it is a fresh confirmation of the whole Lectionary

Theory. Second, it enables us to fix the incidence of the Histories haphfardt for the whole first half of the year: they fall in natural units of about three chapters apiece, and are the same as those I proposed for my D-year. The difference is that they are set eight weeks earlier, for reasons I have anticipated earlier in this chapter, with the compression of Genesis and the expansion of ExodusNumbers. As in my reconstructed D-year, Joshua goes with Gen. 1—17, and Judges with Gen. 18—36, both being compressed into half their former time-span. And third, it shows that only two centuries before Luke was writing, the method was in use of composing a history as a series of fulfilments of the Law and the Prophets as read in cycle. 1 Maccabees neatly bridges the gulf between the Chronicler and the evangelists.

TABLE IV A Reconstruction of the D Lectionary Year Gen. (1), 2—4 6—9, 11 sover Exod. 12—14 Gen. 12—13 14 15 16—(17) 18 19 20—21 22 iecost 24—25 Gen. 26—27 28 29—30 31 32—33 34 35 37 38 39—40 41—42 43—44 45—46 47—48 49—50 Jf-year 50 Exod. 1—5 6—9 <ernacles 10—12 Exod. 13—15 161 Num. 11 17/ INum. 12 Num. 16 19—20 32 33—34 18/ Num. 11 Num. 13—14 20—21 22—24 27 25 20 Deut. 1—3 4—7 8—11 12—16 17—20 21—25 26—28 29—30 31 32 f.

Creation, Adam, Cain Noah, Babel

Josh.

1—2

'Go over", Rahab Jordan crossed dryshod 5—6 Recircumcision, Passover, Jericho Abraham at Shechem, Ai 7—8 Joshua at Ai, Ebal-Gerizim Kings, Melchizedek 9—10 Hivites, Kings, Adonizedek Land of Canaan promised 11—12 Land of Canaan taken (allotted) Ishmael, Covenant with Abr. 23—24 Abraham's Covenant renewed Abr. entertains angels Judg. 6—8(A)JerubbaaI entertains angels 19—21 Scandal at Gibeah Scandal at Sodom Sarah & Birth of Isaac 13 Birth of Samson 10—12 Jephthah's Daughter Sacrifice of Isaac 14—15 Samson's Marriage, etc. Marriage of Isaac 16 Samson and Delilah Isaac's Wealth & Blessing Jacob's Flight: Bethel 1—3 Success of Tribes: Bethel/Bochim Birth of Jacob's Children 1 Sam. 1—3 Birth of Samuel Judg. 17—18 Micah's Teraphim, etc., stolen Rachel steals Teraphim Jacob at Penuel/Succoth 6—8(B) Gideon at Penuel/Succoth 8—9 Earrings, Violence at Shechem Violence at Shechem, Earrings 4—5 Deborah & Barak, Song Death of Deborah, Rachel 1 Sam. 4—6 Loss Jt Recovery of Ark Joseph and Brothers 7—9 A King Judah & Tamar Joseph in Prison 10—12 Rise of Saul Joseph to Power 13—15 Saul's Downfall 16—18 Anointing & Rise of David Joseph's Brothers at Court Joseph's Discovery 19—21 David Flees Jacob to Egypt, Ephraim St. M. 22—24 David in the Hold Jacob Dies 25—27 David's Freebooting Jacob Dies 28—30 Endor, etc.) Oppression in Egypt 1 Sam. 31 —2 Sam. 2 Philistines' Victory Plagues 2 Sam. 3—5 David takes Jebus Exodus 6—9 Ark to Jerusalem, David's Covenant 10—12 Bathsheba Red Sea, Song 13—15 Rise of Absalom Manna and Quails Massah/?Miriam 16—18 Fall of Absalom Dathan and Abiram 19—21 David's Triumph 22—24 David's Last Words, Plague Horeb, Commandments Golden Calf 1 Kings 1—2 Solomon King 2nd Table, Ark, Levites 3—5 Solomon's Wisdom Call of Seventy 6—8 Building of Temple Spies 9—11 Solomon's Glory Embassies, Sihon & Og 12—14 Rehoboam and Jeroboam Balaam 15—16 Abijam, Asa/Baasha, Omri 17—18 Elijah at Zarephath, Carmel Joshua's Charge 19—20 Elijah at Horeb, Ben-hadad Phinehas, Baal-peor 2 1 - -22 Naboth, Micaiah Meribah 2 Kings 1—2 Elijah Ascends Sermon I 3—4 Elisha at War, at Shunem Sermon II 5—6 Elisha & Naaman, at Dothan Sermon III 7—8 Siege of Samaria Laws I 9—11 Jehu, Athaliah Laws II 12—14 Jehoash to Amaziah Laws III 15—17 Fall of Israel Blessing & Curse—Exile I 18—20 Hezekiah Exile & Restoration II 21—23 Manasseh, Josiah Law-reading, Over Jordan 24—25 Fall of Judah Exile & Restoration III

The numbers in the left-hand column signify the sabbaths, from the first in Nisan. 139

TABLE V 1 Macc. as Readings between Pentecost and New Year 1 MACC. 2.49 ff. 2.69 f. 3.4 3.12 3.16 3.18 3.24 f. 3.46 4.6 4.9 4.17 4.24 4.30 4.32 5.2 5.6, 9 ff. 5.24-7 5.33 6.43 7.33

Mattathias addresses sons, Judah to lead Mattathias blesses sons, dies, buried, lamented Judah like a lion . . . Apollonius' Sword Beth-horon, Judas' small company To save by many or by few Flight to Philistia, Trembling Place of Prayer at Mizpah No armour or swords Our fathers saved at the Red Sea Fight first, spoils afterwards Song after victory Goliath & David, Jonathan & Armour-bearer Strength to melt away Took counsel to destroy race of Jacob Letters from Gilead, Timotheus the Ammonite Tomorrow they will encamp Three Companies Eleazar the champion

TORAH/HIST. Gen. 49 Gen. 50 Gen. 49.9 1S.17.51, 21.9 1S.13.15-18 IS.14.6 IS.14.14-22 1S.7, 10 IS.13.19-22 E.14 IS.14.30 E.15, 1S.18 1S.11, 14

SID./HAPH. 12. G.47—50 1S.10—12 13. E.1—5 1S.13—15

E.l—14 1S.11.1-4 1S.11.9 1S.I1.11 2S.23, IS.22

15. E.10—13a IS. 19—21

Nicanor threatens priests

14. E.6—9 1S.16—18

is.i4.is r.

1S.22.11-19 )

(8

Embassy to Rome

9.6 f. 9.11 9.18 f. 9.20 9.30 9.58 ff. 10.7 ff. 10.21 10.26-44 10.71 ff. 11.9 f. 11.17 11.20-52 11.58 11.60-2 12.1

Judas' army fears and deserts Bacchides' slingers and archers Judas falls and is buried How is the mighty fallen! Jonathan chosen to be prince and leader instead Jonathan betrayed, pursued, escapes to wilderness Jonathan builds Jerusalem, captures strongholds Jonathan puts on holy garments at Tabernacles Demetrius gives land, shekels, for sanctuary Apollonius challenges Jonathan Ptolemy gives his daughter the second time Zabdiel brings Alexander's head to Ptolemy Jonathan besieges and captures citadel Antiochus sends Jonathan golden vessels Jonathan through Syria to Damascus, hostages Jonathan sends embassies to Rome and Sparta

1S.28.5 1S.31J 1S.31 2S.1.19 ff. 2S.2.4 1S.23—24 2S.5.9 E.28, 40 E.30.11 ff. 2S.2.12 ff. 2S.3.12 2S.4.7 ff. 2S.5.4-8 2S.8.10 2S.8 2S.10.1 ff.

13.1 13.26 ff. 14.4-15

Jonathan son of Absalom to Joppa Simon builds pillars as a monument Peace, victuals, vine & fig-tree, Temple

2S.13ff. 2S.18.18 1K.4

15.32

Athenobius'amazement at Simon's glory and gold 1K.4, 10

16.2 16.16

Simon's Last Words to his sons 2S.22—1K.2 Simon murdered at banquet after drinking freely 2S.13.28 f. iv An IK.11.49

16. E.13b—17 1S.22—24 17. E.18—20 1S.25—27 18. E.21—24 1S.28—30 19. E.25—27a 1S.31—2S.3

20. E.27b—30a 2S.4—6

21. E.30b—34 2S.7—9

22. E.35—38a 2S.10—12 23. E.38b—40 2S.13—15 24. L.l—5 2S.16—18 25. L.6—8 2S.19—21 26. L.9—11 2S.22—24

The italicized references in the penultimate column are those which fit exactly with the sidrdt in the right-hand column (traditional arrangement as in Table I), and the Histories as divided on pp. 127, 139. 140

LUKE AND THE HISTORIES

The lectionary theory which I am elaborating now becomes a straitjacket: and if straitjackets do not fit, they are not comfortable. When I proposed the thesis that Luke was drawing on the sidrdt for the matter of much of his pericopae, I had little enough manoeuvring space. The sidrdt were fixed, for I took them over from today's synagogue unamended; but the pericopae were not quite fixed— sometimes the rubrics allowed a suspension of judgement, and in the Deuteronomic section I modified my hypothesis, supposing three pericopae to a sidra. But now I have nailed my Lucan lessons in place, and my haphfardt have nailed themselves as far as 3 Kms 8 at Tabernacles; if we follow tradition and put Elijah's zeal of 3 Kms 19 opposite Phinehas' zeal at Num. 25, as seems prudent, there is an end of my freedom. All I can do is look and see if there are any signs that Luke has drawn on the Histories in the same way that I have represented him as drawing on the Law, reading by reading: and what happier condition than for once to have no variables, no escape? Luke claims that the Prophets are as much indicative of Christ as the Law. We are now in a position to see the theory tested: the Gospel, as divided in Table III, and the Histories, as divided in Table V, and extended, are set out in parallel in Table VI on p. 156. The 5th haphfarah, which is to fall opposite our first Lucan reading, is the story of Gideon, the Lucan counterpart being the annunciation of John. The stories make a fair pair, for the angel of the Lord appeared to Gideon as the angel of the Lord appeared to Zechariah, and in both cases (naturally) to announce divine destiny. Now, the annunciation of John's birth is formed on the annunciation of Isaac's birth in the sidra; and there were, as we noted in the last chapter, two continuations of Isaac's annunciation in the Book of Judges, the annunciations to Gideon and to Manoah. The Manoah-Samson story comes in haphfarah 7, as it happens; opposite to which Luke tells the story of John's birth. So it might well seem to the Evangelist a fulfilment of Samson's birth in John's birth, and proper therefore to draw from Samson inferences also about John's annunciation. John, after all, came not drinking wine (Matt. 11.18; Luke 7.33), and is really better suited than Jesus to fulfil 141

Samson the Nazirite/Nazoraean (Matt. 2.23).1 So Luke might for this reason put into Gabriel's mouth, as said to Zechariah, the words once spoken by the angel to Manoah, 'He shall (Let her) not drink wine or strong drink' 2 (1.15, Judg. 13.14, 4, 7). Gabriel greets Mary with the angel's greeting to Gideon, 'The Lord is with thee' (1.28; Judg. 6.12), and also Deborah's word to Jael, 'Blessed (art thou) among women' (1.42; Judg. 5.24).3 The 6th haphfarah, which falls to Mary's Annunciation, is, then, the Jephthah story, and what more suitable than the tale of the virgin girl who so willingly surrendered herself to the will of God? 'Ah, ah, my daughter', cries her father, 'with trouble have you troubled me (£rdpa£a<;)', but the girl replies, 'Do to me as it went out of your mouth' (Judg. 11.35 f.). So is Mary troubled (8iExapdx0n, Luke 1.29) but consenting: 'Let it be to me according to your word' (1.38). Jephthah's daughter had not known a man (Judg. 11.39); Mary says, 'How shall this be since I know not a man?' (Luke 1.34). But since Jephthah's daughter's sad words are not entirely suited to the present joyful occasion, Luke might again borrow forward from a parallel of closer content, Hannah. The Histories have two marvellous conceptions, Samson and Samuel; and since Samson is said to have begun to save Israel and has his fulfilment in John, surely Jesus will be the greater Samuel. Mary's reply, then, 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord', echoes Hannah's phrase in prayer, 'O Lord . . . look upon the lowliness of thy handmaid' (1.38; 1 Kms 1.11): and, famously, her Magnificat is largely built on the framework of Hannah's Song. The Lord has now 'looked upon the lowliness of his handmaiden' (1.48; 1 Kms 1.11): as Hannah sang of her heart being established in the Lord, of her rejoicing in his salvation, of his enfeebling of the mighty and the rich and exalting of the humble and poor, so does Mary. The tone, the structure, the theme and often the words of the two hymns are the same. 1 2 3

See below, p. 217. Luke has oticepa, like the Judg. A text; Judg. B has n&hxTna. criicspoc is in all texts of the Nazirite law in Num. 6. I suggested in a footnote to the last Chapter that the book of Tobit was developed as a cycle of haggadah against a reading of the book of Genesis between Passover and Pentecost. Tobit also has obvious points of contact with Luke 1—2, read over the same period. Raphael is a named angel who goes in and out before the glory of the Holy One (Tobit 12.15), like Gabriel who stands in the presence of God (Luke 1.19). The atmosphere of prayer and almsgiving, of looking for the redemption of Israel and faithful discharge of the commandments, fills the families of Tobit and Raguel as it does those of Zechariah and Mary, with Simeon, Anna and the shepherds. The memorial of Tobit's prayers and pious acts brought before God (Tob. 12.12) is found again with Zechariah, and, later in Luke, with Cornelius.

The 7th haphfarah is the Samson story, which has already been used at John's annunciation; but Luke retains a reminiscence of it at the end of his Lection 7. 'The child' (Samson) 'matured and the Lord blessed him, and the Spirit of the Lord began to go out with him' (Judg. 13.24 f.): 'the child' (John) 'grew and became strong in spirit' (1.80). Otherwise the only parallel is again between Hannah's Song and, this time, the Benedictus. 'My horn is exalted in God . . . I rejoice in his salvation', sang Hannah: 'He has raised up a horn of salvation for us', says Zechariah. Hannah's influence is perhaps felt in Lection 8 also, Jesus' birth, where the old prophetess in the Temple is named after her; and the Lection ends, 'And the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom; and the favour of God was upon him' (2.40). The 8th haphfarah is actually the seemingly unpromising stories of Danite and Benjaminite wickedness in Judg. 17—21: we cannot but note that the Levite and his concubine came to Gibeah from Bethlehem-Judah and 'sat down in the street of the city, and there was no one who conducted them into a house to lodge' (Judg. 19.15). Perhaps Luke saw here a prophecy of Joseph of Bethlehem's coming with his wife to his city, where there was no room for them in the inn. But the Hannah story comes fully into its own with Lection 9, to which it stands as haphfarah. Elkanah and his wife used to go up from year to year to worship and sacrifice to the Lord at Shiloh, as Jesus' parents did at Jerusalem. When the child Samuel was three, Hannah brought him up to leave him in the Lord's house to serve, and so does Jesus, at the age of twelve, remain behind in the Temple when his parents return home. 'The child' (Samuel) 'grew before the Lord', and 'was good with God and with men' (1 Kms 2.21, 26): Jesus 'increased in wisdom and in stature' likewise, 'and in favour with God and man' (2.52). Other factors than the haphfardt have settled the form of the first four Lucan lections, partly formal factors, the John-Jesus antithesis, partly the sidrdt and other Scriptures; but it is hard not to think that the Hannah haphfarah has been the formative influence on Lection 9—the stories agree too closely. The hypothesis of liturgical influence from the Histories is here strongly endorsed, and the dozen other referenceswhichlhave given from Judg. 1—1 Kms 3 in the first four lections would be considerable confirmatory material. The lectionary theory explains the Judges-Hannah atmosphere of Luke 1—2 convincingly. Lection 10 is the Pentecostal preaching of John: haphfarah 10, the loss and recovery of the ark. Luke is now into traditional synoptic material, and the Histories echoes become more doubtful. Perhaps the bad high priests Annas and Caiaphas are shadows of the bad

high priests Hophni and Phinehas: Luke's mind seems to be not far from the story, for the first of the symbolic names with which he fills his Genealogy is that of Eli, as Jesus' grandfather. Lection 11 is Jesus' Baptism and Genealogy: haphfarah 11, Israel's demand for a king, culminating in Samuel's anointing of Saul. Samuel's words, 'Has not the Lord anointed thee to be ruler of his people?' (1 Kms 10.1) might seem well suited to Jesus' Baptism. More confidently, I have argued in the last chapter that the first Book of Maccabees was read as a supplementary lesson between Pentecost and New Year, from the 11th week of the cycle; and Luke has given the name Mattathias and its abbreviations some prominence in his Genealogy. The first seven names begin and end with a Joseph, the second seven begin and end with a Mattathias, of whom the first (chronologically later) would about coincide with the father of the Maccabees. There is a Matthat son of Levi at no. 3 besides, and the same again at no. 31, and a Mattatha the son of Nathan at no. 40: Jorim, too, the son of Matthat, no. 30, is probably the same as Joarib/Joarim (MSS SA), the ancestor of Mattathias at 1 Macc. 2.1. Luke's Genealogy shows Jesus to be the spiritual successor not only of the patriarchs, Levi, Simeon, Judah, and Joseph, but also of the good high priests like Eli and his latter-day heir Mattathias. There are suggestive texts for the following weeks as well. In haphfarah 12, Samuel says to Saul,' "The Spirit of the Lord shall come mightily upon you, and you shall prophesy with them, and shall be turned into another man." . . . And the Spirit of God came mightily upon him, and he prophesied among them' (1 Kms 10.6,10). In reading 12, Luke describes Jesus as led by the Spirit to his Temptations, able to resist the devil in his new-found power: soon to return in the power of the Spirit to Nazareth, where he proclaims, 'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me' (4.1, 14, 18). Haphfarah 13 recounts the story of Saul's rejection of God—he forbids the army to eat, he is responsible for the people eating the spoil with the blood, he nearly has Jonathan killed, disobeys the berem, and appropriates the best of the spoil. Samuel pronounces God's judgement: 'Rebellion is as the sin of divination, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, he has rejected you from being king' (1 Kms 15.23, 26). Luke recalls the story in Paul's sermon at Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13.21 f.). In his 13th lection he tells the tale of Jesus' rejection by his compatriots at Nazareth, and of the hint of his coming mission outside Israel. No prophet is acceptable in his own country. They rejected Moses and Samuel, and always resist the Holy Spirit. Both in Egypt and with Saul, God's salvation was off to a false start; but David, like Moses, escaped murder to

bring a better deliverance, and so does Jesus (Luke 4.29 f.). In haphfarah 14, David, God's true son, is anointed, and the Spirit of the Lord came on him from that day forward (1 Kms 16.13). An evil spirit from the Lord comes upon Saul, and David is sent for: 'and it came to pass when the evil spirit was upon Saul that David took his harp and played with his hand: and Saul was refreshed and it was well with him, and the evil spirit departed from him' (.23). In Luke's 14th lection Jesus begins lis healing ministry by casting out the unclean spirit from a man who had the spirit of an unclean demon in the synagogue. Whether or no Luke had these last passages from the Histories in mind we cannot know. Up to this point he has had a certain freedom, and the parallels are there; from lection 14 he begins to follow Mark, and then they are not there—there is no flexibility for introducing matter from the Davidic saga. What David did with the shewbread in 1 Kms 21 is referred to in the order in which Mark gives it, six weeks after the haphfarah was read. It is not until after Tabernacles1 that we find further Histories parallels in the Lucan text. Haphfarah 36 describes the death of Jeroboam's son, and makes a happy contrast with Jairus' daughter, which lies alongside it. Jeroboam's wife comes to the prophet Ahijah to intercede for her sick son, but the prophet pronounces his death, and on her return he dies: Jairus comes to Jesus to intercede for his dying daughter, and when father and healer reach the house she is dead—but not, in this case, dead for long. Since the stories are in contrast we could hardly expect much verbal echo; the alignment is quite striking, but could be accidental. Haphfarah 37 brings us to King Ahab, who persecuted the prophets of Yahweh, and searched for Elijah: the Lucan lection is the Mission of the Twelve, and Herod's opinion of Christ. 'Herod sought to see Jesus' might be an echo of Ahab and Elijah: 'it was said by some that Elijah had appeared' is a reference, if a rather vague one, coinciding with the arrival of Elijah on the scene in the Histories. In haphfarah 38, Elijah is fed by the ravens, he goes to Zarephath and feeds the widow, later raising her son: the Lucan lection is the Feeding of the Five Thousand. Now the miraculous multiplication of oil and meal by Elijah is later paralleled in the feeding of a hundred men with barley-loaves by Elisha (4 Kms 4.42-4). Elisha said, 'Give to the people and let them 1

There is a link between Solomon's parables of trees and those in Mark 4 and Matthew 13; but the parallel is attenuated in Luke. See pp. 258 f.; MLM, pp. 364 ff.

eat. And his servant said, Why should I set this before a hundred men? And he said, Give to the people and let them eat; for thus says the Lord, They shall eat and leave. And they ate and left according to the words of the Lord.' Indeed there is a verbal parallel even closer, for in the famine, while Elijah was in Zarephath, we read that Obadiah fed a hundred men by fifties in a cave with bread and water (3 Kms 18.4). So now, in Luke, does Jesus make the men sit down in companies, about fifty each; he commands the Twelve, 'You give them something to eat' (9.13); he stills their protest and multiplies the loaves till there are basketfuls left over. In haphfarah 39, Elijah confounds the prophets of Baal on Carmel: the Lucan lesson is the scene at Caesarea Philippi, and the stern words on discipleship that follow. The disciples tell Jesus that some say he is Elijah, so we have a direct reference. An indirect one might be Elijah's challenge to the people, 'If the Lord is God, go you after him' (3 Kms 18.21): Luke transcribes from Mark, 'If any man would come after me, let him deny himself . . . ' (9.23). 'Whoever would save his life shall lose it' (.24) might make an apt motto for the slaughtered prophets of Baal. But the 40th haphfarah is more impressive: Elijah hears the voice of God on Mount Horeb as Jesus hears the voice of God on the mount of Transfiguration. Not only are the two scenes closely parallel in themselves, but the Gospel introduces Elijah by name. There had been two mountain theophanies in the Old Testament, to Moses in the cloud of glory on Sinai, and to Elijah in the great wind on Horeb: both prophets now appear to Jesus in his cloud of glory on the mountain. What is particularly interesting about this series of 'fulfilments' is not just that they fall in exactly the right places, but that Luke is, in this section of the Gospel, not his own master. He is following the pericopae as set out in order in Mark, and the Long Omission is irrelevant to the matter, because Luke has, as I have said,1 merely left out the weekday readings for Dedication from Mark. In other words the pericopae were already set in liturgical parallel, or nearly so, by Mark. Others have attempted to order an account of the things which have come to fulfilment from the Elijah cycle: Luke has, it may seem, followed out all the parallels accurately, and provided pattern correspondences. The two short lections which finish the Marcan series, the Possessed Boy and the Disciples' Failures, have no parallel that I can see with the stories of Naboth and Micaiah.

1

From 9.51 Luke leaves Mark, and the influence of Elijah and p. 89 f., above.

Elisha becomes more insistent. Haphfarah 44 (4 Kms 1—3) describes the destruction of the two captains of fifty and their fifties by fire from heaven as they come to arrest Elijah. The prophet is then assumed into heaven, and Elisha takes his mantle and begins a career of wonders. The week's lessons run in Luke from 9.51 to 10.24. At 9.51 comes the portentous opening, 'When the days for his assumption were fulfilled...'. Jesus is refused by the Samaritans, and James and John ask him, 'Lord, do you want us to bid fire come down from heaven and consume them?' The words are nearly verbatim from 4 Kms 1.10, and we do not require the Western interpolation 'as Elijah did' to give us the reference. The call of Elisha was already a topic of midrashic reworking by Matthew (Matt. 8.21),1 where the intending disciple says, 'Lord, let me first go and bury my father' and Jesus replies, 'Follow me'; as Elisha had said, 'Let me kiss my father and my mother, and then I will follow you' (3 Kms 19.20). Luke inserts the two Matthaean candidates here, and adds a third of his own, 'I will follow you, Lord: but let me first say farewell to those at my home.' Jesus said to him, 'No one who puts his hand to the plough and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.' The third man's petition is closer to Elisha than Matthew's second: and Elisha, when called, was ploughing with twelve yoke of oxen. All these references come in the first of the three sub-lessons. In the second, Luke is over-writing Q/Matthew's Mission Charge, and he inserts, 'And salute no one by the way'. Now Elisha had sent Gehazi before him to raise the dead boy at Shunem, laying his stick on the lad's face, and had bidden him, 'If you meet any man you shall not bless him' (4 Kms 4.29). Since the Matthaean charge includes the command to raise the dead, abbreviated by Luke to 'heal the sick', it is natural to take the Gehazi reference now, even if it is a week early. Perhaps it is significant in the same sense that Luke does not forbid a staff to the apostles, as Matthew does. The command to remain in the same house in which hospitality has been offered also finds an echo in the same haphfarah, for the Shunammite woman constrained Elisha to eat bread, and as often as he went into the city he turned aside to eat there. The next haphfarah, 45 (4 Kms 4—6.23), has been almost equally influential. It opens with the woman whose children were about to be taken into slavery, and closes with Elisha's capture of the blinded Syrian army; the Lucan lessons are the Good Samaritan, Mary and Martha, and the teaching on Prayer. In 4 Kms 4.1-7 Elisha says to the woman, 'Ask for yourself without from all your neighbours . . . and you shall go in and shut the door on you and your s o n s . . . . 1

MLM, p. 323.

And she departed from him, and shut the door on herself and on her sons, and she poured on (the oil)'. Jesus teaches that we should ask from God as a man goes and asks his neighbour to lend him bread: 'and he from within shall say . . . The door is now shut and my children are with me in bed' (Luke 11.7). With the 4 Kms 6 story it is slightly more complicated. Elisha brings the captured enemy army to Samaria, and the king asks, 'Shall I smite them?'; to which the prophet replies, No, he is to set bread and water before them and release them. This story is omitted by the Chronicler, who is not interested in the Northern Kingdom, but he turns it to account in the reign of the impious Ahaz, using the story as the basis of a fictitious victory by Israel over Judah. Pekah, king of Israel, brings 200,000 Judaean prisoners to Samaria, and is greeted by the prophet Oded, who reproaches him and bids him release the captives. The story ends with the memorable words, 'And they took the captives, and with the spoil clothed all that were naked among them, and arrayed them and shod them and gave them to eat and to drink, and anointed them, and carried all the feeble of them upon asses, and brought them to Jericho the city of palm trees unto their brethren: then they returned to Samaria.' Luke requires a story about mercy to our neighbour in the broadest sense, and it is this that (on our theory) the liturgy supplies: he turns the scene into a personal occasion, and uses his own words for 'ass' and 'anoint', but the men of compassion from Samaria and the city of Jericho and the general similarity of detail seem to put it beyond question that here we have the genesis of the parable of the Good Samaritan. Haphfarah 46 (4 Kms 6.24—8.29) describes the siege of Samaria, in which Joram withstands the Syrian army, leading on to Elisha's prophecy of Hazael's victories over Jehu; the Lucan lessons are the Beelzebul healing and the material on Pharisaic hypocrisy. The Beelzebul story contains a text which might appeal to Luke as a comment on the fall of the house of Omri: 'every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a house against a house falls.' While Ahab and Joram were kings, Israel was united and strong; when Jehu divided the country Syria came into her own. That Luke did in fact use the prophetic lesson like this is suggested by the changes that he makes in the strong-man paragraph towards the end. In Mark and Matthew the strong man is a civil figure, a kind of Samson: no one can enter his house and spoil his goods without tying him up first. In Luke the image is turned into a national and military occasion. The strong man is now armed (KaGawt^ianfevog), and like Joram is guarding his palace (oci>M|, a word used elsewhere in the Synoptics only of the High Priest's palace and the Roman Prae-

torium). His stronger enemy comes upon him (£neX.8d>v) and conquers him (viKf|
Das Evangelium Lucae (Berlin 1904), p. 71, following Jos. Ant. 18.4.1; cited by J. M. Creed, op. cit., p. 180.

awoken and shut the d o o r . . . ' Why 'the door' for 'the gate'? Why do we need to compete, &ya>viteaee, to get in? It is easier to understand why, if a prophetic lesson has been read in which Jehoiada said, 'And let no one enter the house of the Lord', and 'the porters stood at the gates of the house of the Lord that no one unclean should enter'. As for Gotholia, Iodae said, 'Thrust her outside the house' (2 Chron. 23.6, 19, 14). Yes, as Paul taught the Corinthians, we need to compete (1 Cor. 9.25) if we are to enter the door of heaven. Even more puzzling has been the placing in Luke of the lament, 'Jerusalem, Jerusalem' at the end of 13: it clearly belongs where Matthew has set it in Jesus' Jerusalem ministry, and would seem at once to justify Streeter's remark that if Luke knew Matthew and so moved it, he must have been a crank. 1 But Luke would be no crank if he were carefully following out the parallels. Joash's reign began well, but after Iodae died, 'they forsook the house of the Lord . . . and there was anger against Judah and Jerusalem . . . and he sent them prophets . . . and they did not hear'; and above all he sent them Azarias the son of Iodae, known to the Hebrew Bible as Zechariah, 'and they stoned him at the command of Joash' (2 Chron. 24.18-21): how could the evangelist forbear to draw in the Matthaean comment, 'O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you . . .'? It is to be noted that, as with the Good Samaritan, Luke would need to be fluent in the Chronicles passages parallel to Kings: but then the words jtfiaiv dKpiPffl? in the Prologue are a claim to fluency. Haphfarah 49 (4 Kms 13—14) takes in the reigns of Joachaz, Joash II and Jeroboam II in Samaria, and Amaziah in Jerusalem. Joachaz's reign is the low point of the Syrian wars, and we read, 'There was not left to Joachaz an army except fifty horsemen and ten chariots and ten thousands (86K<X XV>.WI8E?) of infantry' (4 Kms 13.7). In such a situation Joachaz could do nothing else but sue for peace, and the passage falls alongside Luke's words on the cost of discipleship (14.31), 'What king going to encounter another king in war, will not sit down first and take counsel whether he is able with ten thousands (86K<X xiXidmv) to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousands (EIKOOI XIIU&SCOV)?' There comes to mind the similar situation in 2 Kms 8.4 ff., when David took twenty thousands (EIKOOI xifo68e<;) of infantry, and King Thoou sent his son to David fepoTfjaai afrcdv ta el? eipiivnv. 'And if not,' Luke continues, 'while the other is yet a great way off, he sends an embassy and asks terms of peace (£pa>x$ t& npd? slpfivnv, 14.32). The companion illustration, the Tower-builder, bears comparison with the events of the previous 1

The Four Gospels (London 1924), p. 183.

week. There (4 Kms 12.10) Joash collected money before the repairs to the Temple, and 'when they saw that there was much money in the chest, the king's scribe and the high priest . . . counted up the money that was found in the house of the Lord.' Luke cannot speak of rebuilding the Temple now; but the building of watch-towers had been a part of Jesus' parables from the Wicked Husbandmen on. The presence of Chronicles parallels to Kings for the Good Samaritan and the Stoning of the Prophets suggests that Luke could have seen the whole Histories through the Chronicler's glasses. Haphfarah 50 covers the reign of Uzziah in Jerusalem and the fall of Samaria (4 Kms 15—17), of which the latter event is omitted by the Chronicler as of no interest, giving us in its place a midrash on the cause of Uzziah's leprosy. The Lucan readings are from 16.14 to 17.19—Dives and Lazarus, the Servant Ploughing and the Ten Lepers. The leprosy of Uzziah is a striking element in common: in the Old Covenant God smote sinners with leprosy, but now his hand is stretched out to heal. And did he not foreshadow such healing in prophetic times by the cleansing (£ica0apterer|, 4 Kms 5.14) of Naaman the leper by the prophet of God in Samaria? Indeed he, foreigner that he was, returned (fercforpevev) to Elisha glorifying God and asking the prophet to accept a thank-offering (.15). Since the preaching themes were so thick in Luke 10—11, the type of Naaman could suitably be included now alongside the leprosy of Uzziah. Luke mentioned both the widow woman of Zarephath and Naaman the leper in Jesus' programmatic sermon at Nazareth (4.26 f.): the widow of Zarephath finds her fulfilment at Nain; Naaman, in the stranger who returned to give thanks for his cure from leprosy here. Luke could again be developing the Chronicler in haphfarah 51. 4 Kms 18—19 describes the reign of Hezekiah and the deliverance from Sennacherib; but the Chronicler elaborates Hezekiah's piety as the rationale for the later victory, and does so on the generous scale. For three chapters he cleanses the Temple, the Levites and the priests; all sanctify themselves with fasts and offer burnt offerings; the Iyyar Passover is celebrated massively; and the king and 'the children of Israel and Judah brought tithes of everything abundantly . . . tithes of calves and sheep, and tithes of goats' (2 Chron. 31.5 f.). All this stands in sad contrast to the wickedness of his son Manasseh. However, Manasseh in his affliction 'sought the face of the Lord his God and was greatly humbled (frransivdberi) • •. and he prayed (npomi65axo) to him: and he listened to his cry' (33.12 f.). Indeed Manasseh became the classic penitent in later biblical thought, and his Prayer is in the Apocrypha: it contains the words, "Thou therefore, O Lord, that art the God of the just . . . thou hast appointed

repentance unto me a sinner . . . I cannot lift up my head by reason of my s i n s . . . forgive me, O Lord, forgive me' (Pr. of Manasses 4,8). The Lucan readings are from 17.20 to 18.14, of which the third is the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. There is no doubt how the Hezekiah-Manasseh contrast would appear to a disciple of Paul. Hezekiah's virtues were the righteousness of the Pharisees, whose spiritual ancestor the Chronicler was; Manasseh's selfabasement was the type of the publicans who responded to the preaching of the Gospel. The Hezekiahs of the first century trusted in themselves that they were righteous, fasted twice a week, and paid tithes of what was required and what was not; but the Manassehs, humbling themselves, not being willing to lift up their eyes to heaven, but crying, 'God forgive me a sinner'—these are those who are counted righteous. We have perhaps a second and more positive view of Hezekiah in the second of Luke's three lections. Hezekiah was a man of prayer: we have his Prayer in Isa. 38. In the hour of the Rabshakeh's insolence, in the peril of the siege, he laid the Assyrian's letter before God in the Temple and prayed, and God speedily vindicated his chosen by smiting the enemy and raising the siege. It may be that Luke is referring to Hezekiaih in the Unjust Judge as the exemplar of unfaltering prayer; but the Ecclesiasticus passage1 is obviously primary, and prevents confidence. With 18.15 Luke rejoins Mark, and we have three Marcan readings in series, none of which refers obviously to Hezekiah's illness or Manasseh's and Amon's reigns—these have already been expounded. But in the following week Luke inserts the stories of Zacchaeus and the Pounds, which would fall against haphfarah 53 (4 Kms 22—23), the reigns of Josiah and Jehoiakim. Now Jehoiakim was not the natural king of Judah. Josiah's eldest son Joachaz was deposed by Pharaoh Necho, whose puppet Jehoiakim was (23.34): and his reign was a reign of terror, for 'he shed innocent blood, and filled Jerusalem with innocent blood'. Such occasions had been familiar in more recent times, for Archelaus had been a Roman puppet, and had gone to Rome for his crown, pursued by an embassy of protest. Perhaps Jehoiakim's 'innocent blood' had been that of similar protesters: be that as it may, the present faithless of Israel, who will not have the Lord's Christ to rule over them while he is in heaven receiving his kingdom, will surely have a similar fate before them when he returns to take account with his servants. It looks as if Luke is grafting the allegory of the Jehoiakim-Archelaus story on to Matthew's parable of the Talents. Grafts of this impossible kind 1

Ecclus, 35,12-20; see below, p, 210.

require an explanation, and it is the liturgy which provides one. The 54th, last, haphfarah (4 Kms 24—25) completes the tale: Nebuchadnezzar twice besieges Jerusalem, and finally destroys it. 'And he encamped (icapevfiPotXev) against it and built a wall round it' (jrepfrreixos KUKXXO, 25.1), a wall of earth and rubble which Jeremiah calls a x&P«Z (Jer. 40 (33).4). On 9th Ab, 586, the city was captured and its wall dismantled. The people were taken into exile, and in the 137th Psalm, which to this day is set for 9th Ab, they wept (frcX/xijaajiev) over their lot: 'Blessed shall he be', they sang of Babylon, 'who shall seize and dash thine infants against the rock', as the Babylonians had done to theirs. Jeremiah calls the Fall of Jerusalem the time of her visitation Ocaipdc fejnaKOJtfte, 6.15; 10.15). Jesus, at the beginning of Lection 54, a Lucan insertion, weeps (gicXauaev) over Jerusalem: the days will come that your enemies will build a mound (jtotpeuPo&oOaiv X&potKot) against you, and shall encircle you (jrepiKUKXtbooooiv as), and shall dash your children within you. They will not leave stone upon stone because you knew not the time of your visitation.1

It is possible now to make a provisional summing up of our study so far, and to draw some tentative conclusions: (1) There are credible parallels from the haphfarah of the week itself for the following Lucan lections: 5—14, 36—40, 44—51 and 53—54, twenty-five in all out of fifty-four weeks. Of these twentyfive there is verbal evidence for all except three, and often multiple evidence. (2) The parallels are concentrated in three groups: (a) the section from Luke 1.5 to 4.30, where Luke is not following Mark; (b) the section from 8.40 to 9.36, where Luke is, on the lectionary theory, following Mark over the same portion of the year, viz. that part where the Elijah stories were read, 2 and the story preceding; (c) from 9.51 to the end of the year, except for one week where Luke has three Marcan readings. (3) In the section from 9.51 to 21.4 there is a strong correspondence with only one of the three sub-lections in each week, except only 1

1 have omitted discussion of any relation between Luke's Passion and Resurrection stories and the Book of Joshua. There is a possible parallel between the two men whom Jesus son of Nave sent into Jericho (Josh. 2) and the sending of Peter and John into Jerusalem; and an important one between the empty tomb and the king of Jerusalem who was immured in a cave by the rolling of a large stone against its mouth, his coming forth alive and being hanged on a tree till the going down of the sun (Josh. 10)—see below, pp. 303 f. 2 See p. 89.

the two Elisha haphfardt at the beginning of 4 Kms, where two out of the three correspond. (4) In some places the relation between the haphfarah and the gospel lection is incidental, as between Gideon's angel and Zechariah's angel, who is closer to Abraham's and Manoah's angels, or Jephthah's daughter and Mary's acceptance of her calling, which is close to Hannah's; while at other times the relation is substantial, as with Elkanah and Hannah going to the Temple, or Hezekiah and Manasseh and the Pharisee and Publican. In the greater number of the twenty-five cases the relation would seem to be substantial. (5) The question of inferences for and against Luke's having a tradition apart from Scripture in such pericopae is a subtle and involved one, and will require individual treatment. 1 (6) With the Torah correspondences which I have proposed in Chapter 3 a very similar picture emerges. There are credible parallels from the lection of the week with nine sidrdt in Genesis (2, 4—9, 11—12), one in Exodus (13), one in Leviticus (26), the three Tishri festivals of New Year, Atonement, and Tabernacles (27, 30, 31), four in Numbers (35—37, 39), and at least six in Deuteronomy (44—45, 47—49, 51): twenty-four in all. As with the Histories, the concentration is in the Genesis and Deuteronomy areas, and the Deuteronomy parallels are, on a strict computation, with eight of the thirty-three sub-lections (44c, 45A, 47A and B, 48c, 49B and c, 51A); on a count including less certain references, and the carrying over of references from near by, with nine further sub-lections (48A, 49A, 50A and B, 51B and c, 52c, 54A and c). On the whole (except in Genesis) the Torah correspondences are less striking than the Histories ones, partly because stories make more easily discerned parallels than laws; but the latter seem to suggest the themes for a whole week's readings in the Deuteronomy section. Out of this it seems to me that one conclusion is very probable: the lectionary theory is correct. It provides us with a plausible situation of growth for the Gospel, not as a tract launched upon the Greek middle class to win their good will, but as a church book, growing in worship round the year and over the years, and later used in the same way. It makes sense of Luke's Prologue, and especially of the 1

In this book I am trying to establish the existence of cycles of O.T. readings in the first century, and the development of the synoptic Gospels on a similar basis. An interpretation of the evangelists' minds, and a weighing of possibilities of sources other than the O.T. and their predecessors' books must await another occasion.

words xaBe^fl? and rotpTiKoXoo0T)K6Ti fivmBev nfiaiv &Kpi|3ffls. It explains the Genesis-Judges atmosphere in the Infancy stories, the ElijahElisha atmosphere in Luke 9—12, and the Deuteronomy atmosphere thereafter. It has the ideal lessons for the major feasts of Pentecost (John and the Spirit), New Year ('the blind receive their sight. . .'), Atonement (the Sinner), Tabernacles (the Sower) and Passover (the Passion). Above all it has forty-nine exact landfalls, lections which either fit or presuppose a reference to the sidra or Histories reading for the day. Forty-nine landfalls cannot be accidental: the lectionary theory is correct. Nor is forty-nine the final total. We still have Isaiah, and Ecclesiasticus, and other Old Testament books to bring into consideration.

TABLE VI Luke and the Histories Cycle SIDRA 1. G.l—6.8 2. G.6.9-11 PASSOVER 3. G.12—17 4. G.18—22 5. G.23—25.18 6. G.25.19—28.9 7. G.28.10—32.3 8. G.32.4—36 9. G.37—40 PENTECOST 10. G.41—44.17 11. G.44.18—47.28 12. G.47.29—50 13. E.1—5 14. E.6—9 15. E.10—13.16 16. E.13.17—17 17. E.18—20 18. E.21—24 19. E.25—27.19 20. E.27.20—30.10 21. E.30.11—34 22. E.35—38.20 23. E.38.21—40 24. L.1—5 25. L.6—8 26. L.9—11 NEW YEAR 27. L.12—13 28. L.14—15 ATONEMENT 29. 30. L. 19—20 TABERNACLES 31. L.21—24 32. L.25—26.2 33. L.26.3—27 34. N.l—4.20 35. N.4.21—7 36. N.8—12 37. N.13—15 38. N.16—18 39. N.19—22.1 40. N.22.2—25.9 41. N.25.10—30.1 42. N.30.2—32 43. N.33—36 44. D.l—3.22 45. D.3.23—7.11 46. D.7.12—11.25 47. D.11.26—16.17 48. D.16.18—21.9 49. D.21.10—25 50. D.26—29.9 51. D.29.10—30 52. D.31 53. D.32 54. D.33—34

HISTORIES

cf.

LUKE

Josh. 1—2 Rahab Josh. 3—4 Jordan Josh. 5—24 Conquest (included in week) Judg. 1—5 Intro., Deborah Judg. 6—9 Gid., Abimelech Judg. 10—12 Jephthah Judg. 13—16 Samson Judg. 17—21 Dan, Benjamites 1 Kms 1—3 Boy Samuel

20.19—21.4 21.5-end 22—23 24.1-12 24.13-end 1.5-25 1.26-56 1.57-80 2.1-40 2.41-52

Questions Apocalypse Passion Resurrection Emmaus, Ascension John's Ann'n Jesus' Ann'n John's Birth Jesus' Birth Aged 12

1 Kms 4—6 1 Kms 7—9 1 Kms 10—12 1 Kms 13—15 1 Kms 16—18 1 Kms 19—21 1 Kms 22—24 1 Kms 25—28 1 Kms 29—31 2 Kms 1—3 2 Kms 4—6 2 Kms 7—9 2 Kms 10—12 2 Kms 13—15 2 Kms 16—18 2 Kms 19—21 2 Kms 22—24

Ark Recovered Saul Anointed Saul King Saul & Jonathan Rise of David David Flees David in Hold D. to Philistia Death of Saul Civil War Ark to J'salem D. victorious Bathsheba Absalom's Rise Absalom's Fall D's Triumph D's Last Words

3.1-20 3.21-38 4.1-13 4.14-30 4.31-7 4.38-44 5.1-11 5.12-16 5.17-26 5.27-end 6.1-5 6.6-11 6.12-19

John Preaches Baptism Temptations Nazareth Demoniac in Syn. Simon's M.-in-law Apostles Called Leper Paralytic Levi, Fasting Cornfield Withered Hand Call of XII

6.20-end 7.1-10 7.11-17

Sermon on Plain Centurion's Slave Widow at Nain

3 Kms 1—2 3 Kms 3—4 L.16—18 3 Kms 5—6

Solomon King Solomon Wise

7.18-35

John from Prison

S. and Hiram }

7.36-end

Sinner Forgiven

3 Kms 7—8.53 3 Kms 8.54—9 3 Kms 10—11.13 3 Kms 11.14—12 3 Kms 13 3 Kms 14 3 Kms 15 f. 3 Kms 17 3 Kms 18 3 Kms 19 3 Kms 20 3 Kms 21 3 Kms 22 4 Kms 1—3 4 Kms 4—6.23 4 Kms 6.24—8 4 Kms 9—10 4 Kms 11—12 4 Kms 13—14 4 Kms 15—17 4 Kms 18—19 4 Kms 20—21 4 Kms 22—23 4 Kms 24—25

Temple I Temple II End of S. Jeroboam J's Hand J's Son Sick Abijam-Ahab Elijah to Zar. E. at Carmel E. at Horeb Benhadad Naboth Ahab & Micaiah E. Ascends Elisha I Elisha II Jehu Athaliah, Joash Joahaz—Amaziah Fall of Sam. Hezekiah Hez.-Manasseh Josiah-J'kim Fall of Judah

8.1-18

Sower, etc. Mother and Brethren Storm on Lake Gerasene Demoniac Woman with Flux Jairus' Daughter 3 Kms 14 Mission Elijah Feeding 3 Kms 18.4; 17 P's Confession 3 Kms 18.21 Transfiguration 3 Kms 19 Demoniac Boy Greatest Exorcist 4 Kms 1.10, 2, 4.29, etc. 4 Kms 4.1-7, 6/2 Ch. 28 Joram, 4 Kms 1 4 Kms 10.18 ff. 12 Chr. 23. 6 ff., 24.18 ff. 4 Kms 13.7, 2 Kms 8.4 4 Kms 15/2 Chr. 26 2 Chr. 31.5 f„ 33.12 f„ Pr.M

8.19-21 8.22-5 8.26-39 8.40-8 8.49-end 9.1-9 9.10-17 9.18-27 9.28-36 9.37-43a 9.43b-48 9.49-50 9.51—10.24 10.24—11.13 11.14-end 12-13.9 13.10—14.24 14.25—16.13 16.14—17.11 17.12—18.14 18.15-end 19.1-38 19.39—20.18

Josh. 10.16-27 Judg. 6.11; 13.4 Judg. 11.34; 6.12 Judg. 13.14, 24 Judg. 19.15 1 Kms 1—2.26 ?1 Kms 4 1 Kms 9—10, Eli 1 Kms 10.6 1 Kms 15.23 1 Kms 16.13 ff.

4 Kms 23.34 4 Kms 25. Ps. 137, Jer. 40

Italicized references: Col. 2, cf. traditional haphtardt; Col. 3, cf. Mark.

ISAIAH, LUKE AND THE TWELVE If the Former Prophets were developed and used as a cycle of sabbath readings answering to the Law lections, and if Luke can be observed on some fifty occasions as shaping his Gospel-pieces to fit the theme of one or both, what are we to make of the Latter Prophets? Do Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve (Minor Prophets) also have liturgical structures governing the disposition of the oracles of which they are composed? Is there evidence of their being used as annual liturgical cycles in later times, as there was for the Histories? If so, in what way were these various cycles related? And are there signs that Luke drew on readings from them as he did from the sidrdt and the Histories? These are questions to which I cannot attempt more than the briefest outline of an answer; and I propose to limit the field by concentrating attention on two of the four 'books'. Luke, in common with the other two synoptic evangelists, often cites and refers to Isaiah, and less frequently to the Twelve; but he rarely makes reference to Jeremiah, and hardly ever to Ezekiel, and the same is true of Mark, and, with some qualification, of Matthew. We should give priority, therefore, to Isaiah and the Twelve, and I shall reserve the consideration of Jeremiah and Ezekiel for another place.

(i) The Liturgical Origins of Isaiah

I have already touched, in chapter 4, on the reasons for thinking that the Latter Prophets, and in particular Isaiah, were in use as liturgical cycles before the present reading system was established. The traditional series of haphtardt, of which the first three-quarters provide suitable commentary upon the sidrdt, breaks down from Week 42 on into a succession of three minatory and seven consolatory prophecies which do not so correspond. Of these latter, all are drawn from Isaiah, all but the first from Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, and all but one are in the canonical order (no. 47, Isa. 54.11—55.6, being two places too early). They are followed by a further prophecy from the end of Ill-Isaiah, no. 52, Isa. 65.6—66.8. The haphfardt for weeks 46-52 thus consist of the greater part of the 'consoling' passages from Isa. 49.14—66.8, taken almost in order, and against the ancient principle of correspondence with the Law reading. This 157

constitutes prima facie evidence for thinking that Isaiah was used earlier as a cyclical series, and that the more encouraging parts from the end of the cycle were retained in the reform that brought the present system in, in some such way as I have suggested on pp. 109 f. A second indication that the whole of Isaiah was in liturgical use about the turn of the era, and not just the modern selection, is the existence of a targum of the prophet, believed to be ancient even in its present, written form. 1 Since the targums are translations developed in liturgical use, the whole of Isaiah is likely to have been in use for synagogue reading at this period, and earlier. Although this would not disprove a system of ad hoc selection in each synagogue, such a practice would be of extreme inconvenience, partly because the m'thurg'man might not know all the targums by heart, and partly because the physical finding of a passage in some such situation as is envisaged in Luke 4.17 would take several minutes. To this must be added the general consideration that prophecy originated largely in public worship, and is first testified in use in public worship; so the likelihood is that the process of selection and expansion of the oracles took place in public worship also. So Isaiah probably became a book by being a cycle of prophecies used and adapted round an annual cycle of feasts and sabbaths. 2 How, then, would the development of an Isaiah cycle have been related to that of the Histories cycle? I think the answer must be, As an alternative cycle. The D-historians provided a series of haphfardt for their exiled community; perhaps there was a second exiled community which provided Isaiah haphfardt for theirs, enriching the traditions of the eighth century with first the matter of II-Isaiah, and then a further eleven chapters, 56—66, from the inspired words of his disciples. It is not necessary to suppose separate communities, but it is natural to do so, for the exiles are likely to have been fragmented for political reasons. To the returning exiles, both of these cycles would be valid series of 'prophecies', as would Jeremiah from Egypt, and later the Twelve and Ezekiel cycles; yet we cannot imagine the synagogue-service being overladen with reading after reading from every book in the now forming canon. The haphfardt-cycles would be alternatives; the sidrdt were unchanging. We never hear in later times of several haphfardt on a single sabbath, as we should have if this had been primitive practice. 3 1 2 3

J. F. Stenning, The Targum of Isaiah (Oxford 1949), pp. vii ff. See above, pp. I l l f. There is an exception to test the rule in that Hos. 11.7—12.12 and Obadiah are set as alternatives for the eighth sabbath: but this arises from the former being the Ashkenazi, the latter the Sephardi, tradition.

On the contrary, when t w o suitable haphfardt were preserved f o r a feast f r o m different books, they were set for different days of the feast in the later liturgy. T h u s we may think of the president of a synagogue—Luke perhaps—having some f r e e d o m in the choice of the prophetic cycle read. Perhaps he used the F o r m e r P r o p h e t s every other year, a n d Isaiah a n d the Twelve one year apiece in f o u r or five, a n d hardly ever read Jeremiah a n d Ezekiel. Isaiah was the scroll fixed, for the year presumably, in the scene in Luke 4. A n o t h e r community, such as St J o h n the Divine's, might have read Ezekiel a n d Jeremiah o f t e n ; or the r o u n d might be done in strict o r d e r — b u t this c a n n o t have been universal, or the order of the P r o p h e t s would n o t vary as it does between the H e b r e w a n d L X X . 1 So much, as with the Histories, m a y stand as o u r working basis, without prejudice to the flight of imagination which follows. T h e reader m a y still believe t h a t Isaiah was read in L u k e ' s church in an a n n u a l cycle f r o m Nisan, even if he shakes his head over my reconstruction of h o w this came to pass. T h e p r o b l e m of accounting f o r the order of the collections of material within Isaiah appears to me to be unsolved by current theories: 2 an alternative is suggested by the lectionary hypothesis. 1

2

The Hebrew has the familiar order: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Twelve, in manuscripts from Spain; manuscripts from France and Germany, however, have the order: Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, the Twelve, which agrees with b Baba Bathra 14b. Other orders are found, with the Twelve last in each case. In the Greek Bible the order is: the Twelve, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel. See G. W. Anderson, 'Canonical and Non-Canonical', in P. R. Ackroyd & C. F. Evans (eds.) The Cambridge History of the Bible, i (Cambridge 1970), 140. To most modern commentators on Isaiah, e.g. O. Kaiser, Isaiah 1—12 (2e., 1963, E.T., London 1972), Isaiah 13—39 (1973, E.T., London 1974), C. Westermann, Isaiah 40—66, the interest is in the form of the oracles, and their primary or secondary quality, rather than in their arrangement: it does not occur to Westermann, for example, to ask if the present arrangement of Deutero-Isaiah is significant, and therefore important for the meaning of the smaller units which concern him; and it seems quite sensible to ask one scholar to comment on chs. 1—39 and another on chs. 40—66 in the same series. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament, p. 306, accepts the 'usual' view that Isa. 1—35 consists of: (a) 1—12, threats against Judah and Jerusalem, (b) 13—23, threats against foreign nations, and (c) 24—35, promises; and this would correspond with the structure of Ezekiel, and of Jeremiah in the Greek order (where the oracles against foreign nations in Jer. 46—51 (Hebrew) are found in chs. 25 ff.). This collection has then been completed by the addition of the legends (chs. 36—39), and later by the collections known to us as Deuteroand Trito-Isaiah. This view is full of difficulties: (i) 1—12, although in the original form of the oracles mainly minatory, has been so much glossed with more comforting material that (with the remnant promises of Isaiah) it cannot be read as a block of threats, (ii) The considerable element of Isaiah material in 28—32 contains far too much hostile material for the whole of

The primitive kernel of the book is the prophecies of the eighth century, mainly now concentrated in Isa. 1—12, partly scattered through as far as ch. 32. The general tone of these oracles is the coming destruction which God has determined for the sin of his people; these being interwoven with the promise of mercy through the birth of various children, Immanuel in 7, the Prince of Peace in 9, the shoot of Jesse in 11, beside the prophet's own children. The similarity to Genesis is obvious, since that book is in its first part little else than a tale of successive destructions—the Flood, Babel, Sodom—punctuated by the birth of children of promise—Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs. The people are said by Isaiah to have behaved like Sodom and Gomorrah of old (1.9 f.; 3.9): their cities are burned by Yahweh's judgement (1.7; 3.13 f.). He said to Ahaz, 'Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel'; if the king would not believe, surely he would not be established (7.9, 14). Abraham believed the Lord, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness (Gen. 15.6); Sarah his wife would bear him a son, and he was to call his name Isaac (17.19). It was said to him, 'God is with you' ('«lohtm 'imm'kha, 21.22). The work which we call II-Isaiah is by contrast centred on the theme of the new Exodus and the passing of the Desert. 1 'Thus says the Lord God: My people went down at the first into Egypt to 24—35 to be read as a block of promises, (iii) Eissfeldt's suggestion that the editor of 1—35 'had to be content to force into (the Ezekiel) pattern material which was in many respects already arranged' is a confession that the theory does not work, (iv) Even if we allow that Ezekiel carries this arrangement, it does not appear to have been obvious to the prophetic editors that things should be done so. The Hebrew order of Jeremiah, which is likely to be older than the Greek order, has the foreign oracles at the end, and Amos has them at the beginning, while Zechariah has the promises first, the foreign oracles in the middle, and the threats at the end. (v) Even if two or three out of fifteen books show the same arrangement, we still have no explanation. What we want to know is why Isaiah is arranged like this, and we are not helped by being told that Ezekiel is arranged in the same way. (vi) Eissfeldt thinks that some of the oracles in Isa. 24 ff. should be dated in the fourth century, and even (op. cit., p. 326), the third. Why should a third-century editor have 'completed' the book by the addition of the legends? Again, the addition of 2 Kings 24.18—25.30 to the end of Jeremiah as ch. 52 is a good parallel, but not an explanation, (vii) If Isaiah (1—39) was completed in the third century, what was the belief about II- and Ill-Isaiah during the previous three centuries? If they were known to be by some other prophet, not Isaiah, how was Isaianic authorship so lately foisted upon them? If they carried Isaiah's name before, how is it that they were not part of Isaiah's book? (viii) No account is given of the fact that Isa. 35 is a part of Deutero-Isaiah's prophecy. See below, p. 163, n.l. 1 See above, p. 119.

sojourn there . . . Now therefore what have I here, says the Lord, seeing that my people are taken away for nothing?' (52.4 f.). 'You shall not go out in haste, and you shall not go in flight, for the Lord will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard' (52.12). 'Was it not thou . . . that didst make the depths of the sea a way for the redeemed to pass over? And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with singing' (51.10 f.). 'Thus says the Lord, who makes a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters, who brings forth chariot and horse, army and warrior; they lie down, they cannot rise, they are extinguished, quenched like a wick' (43.16 f.). 'They thirsted not when he led them through the deserts; he made water flow for them from the rock; he cleft the rock and the water gushed out' (48.21). 'The former things I declared . . . lest you should say, "My idol did them, my graven image and my molten image commanded them" ' (48.3 ff.). 'Make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and hill be made low' (40.3 f.). The following chapters, which we call Ill-Isaiah, lack this consistent stress, but show a relationship to Deuteronomy in many particulars. I mention some of the best known. Both works have a universalist interest. No foreigner or eunuch is to despair, if he keeps the sabbath; 'for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples' (Isa. 56.7)—cf. Deut. 23.1 ff., where no eunuch, Ammonite or Moabite is to enter the assembly of the Lord, but the 'sojourner' is an accepted part of Israel at worship (29.11). The two works both show a concern for the poor: 'Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke? Is it not to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house...?' (Isa. 58)— cf. Deut. 15.1 ff., where under the law of release debts are not to be exacted from one's brother, and 15.7 ff., 'you shall not harden your heart, or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him . . . ' Where Deut. 30 prophesied that on Israel's repentance God would make them more prosperous and numerous than their fathers, Isaiah promises that aliens shall be their ploughmen and vinedressers; for their shame they shall have double; they shall no more be called Desolate and Forsaken (61 f.). In Isa. 63 God comes from Edom (cf. Deut. 33.2) for the day of his vengeance (cf. Deut. 32.35), pouring out his enemies' lifeblood to intoxication (cf. Deut. 32.42); he carried Israel all the days of old (cf. Deut. 32.11), but they rebelled (cf. Deut. 32.15). In Isa. 65 God says, 'I spread out my hands all the day to a rebellious people . . . a people who provoke me to my face continually, sacrificing in

gardens and burning incense upon bricks . . . I will not keep silent but I will repay into their bosom their iniquities . . I n Deut. 32 God says, 'They have stirred me to jealousy with what is no god; they have provoked me with their idols. So I will stir them to jealousy with those who are no people; I will provoke them with a foolish nation.' The last two passages are linked by Paul (Rom. 10.19-21). There is no sign, at least in I- and II-Isaiah, of any serial correspondence such as I have suggested between parts of the Histories and the Law; and in the case of I-Isaiah and Genesis the parallel is rather general. But this would be natural, since I- and II-Isaiah are collections of oracles bearing at the most a general relationship to Israel's Heilsgeschichte, perhaps through a common setting in life as prophecies and recitals at the Festivals. What is striking is that we seem to have a fundamental three-part structure to the sixth-century Isaiah corpus corresponding to the fundamental Triteuchal structure to the sixth-century Torah; and just as the redactors of the fourth century inserted a new middle into the Law, so did later 'editors' fill in the middle of Isaiah. They left the Genesis-like I-Isaiah matter at the beginning; then they sited the oracles against foreign oppressors in chs. 13—23, including Egypt (19 f.); then various assorted material looking forward to God's judgement (24—35); then the bulk of II-Isaiah with its echoes of Numbers; and last, IIIIsaiah with its parallels to Deuteronomy. The book ended with the promise to create a new heaven and a new earth, which, on a lectionary theory, would look forward to the reading of Gen. 1 the next week. The Jewish year is not just a sabbath-series: it has its climax in 'the Feast', the autumn festival of Tabernacles, preceded in the fourth century by New Year on 1st Tishri, and Atonement on 10th. It is this centrepiece of the Israelite calendar which provides an explanation for the ordering of the central section of Isaiah. It was at the autumn Feast that God was to come in judgement and deliverance:1 a judgement that was to be awaited with trembling 1

New Year is in modern Judaism a time for personal penitence. It is preceded by a month of sounding the shdfar to warn of its approach, and special penitential prayers in the preceding week: it is often called Y6m hadDin, the Day of Judgement. The sounding of trumpets on the day itself (Lev. 23.24; Num. 29.1) is understood as a call to repentance. The characteristic features of the New Year liturgy are the three series of proper benedictions, known as the Malkuyot, the Zikronot, and the Shofarot, each consisting of ten texts from Scripture on the respective themes of God's kingship, his remembering of men's good and bad deeds and of his covenant, and the trumpet-blasts of the Bible. It is not dissimilar in tone from the Christian Advent, with a strong element of joy to it which is at first surprising. All this must go back, at least

a n d penitence by Israel also, especially f r o m N e w Year to A t o n e ment, b u t at the Festival with confidence. There are to this day sabbaths of R e b u k e a n d of Consolation in the weeks before N e w Y e a r , a n d it was to this period t h a t the 'editors' set the old judgements a n d hopes of chs. 28—32, a n d the m o r e recent 'apocalyptic' pieces of 24—27, 33 f. But the glad news of G o d ' s vindication a n d saving of Israel was above all the message of Deutero-Isaiah, a n d comes over nowhere so forcibly as in the opening oracles of his prophecy: 'Behold, your G o d will come with vengeance, with the recompense o f G o d . H e will come a n d save y o u . . . C o m f o r t , c o m f o r t m y people, says your G o d . . . I n the wilderness prepare the way o f the L o r d . . . Behold y o u r G o d ! Behold, the L o r d G o d comes with might, a n d his a r m rules f o r h i m ; behold, his reward is with him, a n d his recompense before h i m ' (Isa. 35.4; 40.1, 3, 9 f.). Isa. 35 was originally the opening of the II-Isaiah oracles: 1 it has been separated f r o m the m a i n b o d y because it was felt to be an ideal N e w Y e a r lesson, while Isa. 40 c o m m e n d e d itself as suited to Tabernacles. in outline, to the Mishnaic period, in which it was said, 'On New Year's Day all that come into the world pass before him like legions of soldiers (or, flocks of sheep), for it is written, "He that fashioneth the hearts of them all, that considereth all their works" ' (m RH 1.2). There is a similar sense of joy at God's coming judgement of the nations in the old autumn festival psalms, e.g. 2, 46—48, 93—99. 1 The inclusion of Isa. 35 with the oracles of Deutero-Isaiah was first proposed by C. C. Torrey, The Second Isaiah (Edinburgh 1928), pp. 103 f., 279-304, and has gained some adherents. The alternative explanation has been that Isa. 35 has been influenced by II-Isaiah. But it should be noted: (i) The strongest links are not with II-Isaiah in general, but with 40.1-11 in particular—the highway (maslul, 35.8; m'sillah, 40.3) which is to be Yahweh's way of procession, 'Behold your God' (35.4; 40.9), the revelation to the whole world of God's glory (35.2; 40.5), his coming recompense (35.4; 40.10). (ii) 40 opens with the plural imperative ('Comfort my people') for which no vocative is supplied, and none is easily suppliable; but, if 40.1 ff. followed on, one could well be supplied from the wilderness and desert in 35.1 ff. Inanimate nature is often thought of as acting in II-Isaiah, as when the heavens, earth, mountains, etc., are called upon to sing (44.23), or Zion and Jerusalem are to bear the good news to the cities of Judah (40.9). It is the wilderness and desert which are apparently to strengthen the weak hands at 35.3. (iii) The continuity of thought between 35.10 and 40.1 is good: 'They shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away. Comfort, comfort my people . . . ' . (iv) 11-Isaiah's oracles frequently form a chiasmus over a passage of some twenty verses, e.g. 40.12—41.7 on the incomparability of God, 41.8—42.9 on Israel, 'my servant, my chosen*. This characteristic, which is a key to the structure of the whole, is similarly instanced in 35 + 40.1-11, with the themes of the first chapter being repeated in the second. The reluctance by scholars to accept 35 as a part of II-Isaiah has been connected with its separation from 40—55, which have survived redaction as a single block.

The legends were used for the period in between. In this way we are able to explain all the features of the middle of the book. The promises and threats of 24—34 are placed to lead up to New Year; the consolatory message of II-Isaiah runs from New Year and Tabernacles on, being split because of the two feasts; the intervening legends supply the liturgical needs of the two intervening weeks. Isa. 36—39 have been introduced as a slight elaboration of 2 Kings 18 f. Ch. 36 pictures the pride of the Assyrian king in menacing Zion through the Rabshakeh; in ch. 37 Hezekiah rends his clothes and covers himself with sackcloth and prays, and God delivers him from Sennacherib; in ch. 38 Hezekiah's sickness and bitter weeping of 2 Kings 20 is elaborated by a prayer (.9-20), in answer to which God delivers him; ch. 39 completes the Isaiah tradition with the Babylonian embassy. The two central chapters are thus placed, both by their themes and their position, to provide lessons for the two services of Atonement: New Year Tishri I Atonement a.m. Atonement p.m. Tishri n Tabernacles

Lev. 12 f. Lev. 14 f. Lev. 16 Lev. 17 f. Lev. 19 f. Lev. 21—24

Isa. 35 Isa. 36 Isa. 37 Isa. 38 Isa. 39 Isa. 40

There is thus a suitable lesson for each part of the festal complex. Atonement was a fourth-century innovation at Jerusalem, and required new material teaching God's forgiveness of sins when Israel turns to him with self-affliction: and this material, with limited amplification, was just what the two main Isaiah stories— Sennacherib's invasion and Hezekiah's sickness—provided. The additions to the latter notably increase its aptness as an evening Atonement reading. 'I cry for help until morning . . . from day to night thou dost bring me to an end' (38.13); cf. 'You shall afflict yourselves; on the ninth day of the month (Tishri) beginning at evening, from evening to evening . . . ' (Lev. 23.32). 'Thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back' (38.17), like Israel's sins in the Atonement ritual. A lectionary theory thus accounts for all the quirks of the Isaiah corpus.

(ii) Luke and Isaiah 1—12 In view of all this, it seems reasonable to think that the Lucan church would have inherited the option of an annual cycle of haphfardt from Isaiah, beginning with Isa. 1 on the first Sunday in Nisan.

Although we do not have the checks that we had with the Histories from later Jewish use in 1 Macc. and in the traditional haphfardt, we can form a fair idea of which chapters would be read on which sabbaths, by a mechanically even division. This cannot give us the accurate information which we had with the sidrdt, and could hope for with the Histories, but it is a good beginning, and it is this that I have set out in the second column of Table VII, combining the eleven shortest chapters in the book with their neighbours, so as to reduce the total from sixty-six chapters to fifty-five lessons (54 sidrdt and the evening of Atonement). The point of doing it like this is to emphasize the roughness of the estimate. Not only is our knowledge limited—they may have used a series of chapters through the festivals, for example—but it is also very possible that there was no generally accepted series of divisions, and each synagogue did its best. On the mechanical division chs. 35—40 fall on the festal days in the middle of the year as in the table on the previous page. It seems prudent to take these chapters, and the beginning and end of the book, as fixed, and for the rest to be on our guard for parallel use in the Writings and New Testament, within not very broad limits. If, as an alternative view, we supposed a chapter to be taken on each of the festal days of Passover-Unleavened Bread and Tabernacles, then we should have chs. 3—10 for the former, and 40—47 for the latter. Such an arrangement would partly fit with the traditional haphtarah for the eighth day of Unleavened Bread, Isa. 10.32—12.6, of which the last part, Isa. 12, carries strong echoes of Moses' Song in Exod. 15;1 there would be about twenty-two chapters (13—34) for the twenty-two/-three sabbaths between Unleavened Bread and New Year, but only nineteen (48—66) for the same number of sabbaths between Tabernacles and 1st Nisan. The first Lection of the year in Luke, as I have set it out, was Luke 20.19—21.4, the three stories of the question of the scribes' spies (tribute to Caesar), the Sadducees' question (on the resurrection), and the two short units on widows. In the former of these last, Jesus warns his disciples against the scribes who like the show of religion, the robes and the respect and the best seats in the synagogue, but at the same time 'devour widows' houses and for a pretence make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation' (20.46 f.). In the latter he commends the generosity of the poor widow, in contrast to the giving of the rich from their superfluity 1

Isa. 12.2, 'For the Lord God is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation'; Exod. 15.2, 'The Lord is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation'. Isa. 12.5, 'Sing praises to the Lord, for he has done gloriously'; Exod. 15.1, 'I will sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously'.

(21.1-4). The theme bears some resemblance to that of Isa. 1, which is an onslaught on the hypocrisy of worship when combined with social injustice, and the prophet singles out in particular the treatment of orphans and widows: 'What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the Lord; I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed beasts . . . When you come to appear before me, who requires of you this trampling of my courts? . . . Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me, I am weary of bearing them. When you spread forth your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not listen . . . learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow . . . Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves. Every one loves a bribe and runs after gifts. They do not defend the fatherless, and the widow's cause does not come to them' (Isa. 1.11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 23). Luke's second Lection is 21.5-end, the Apocalyptic Discourse, and Isa. 2 is the prophet's most apocalyptic chapter: 'Enter into the rock, and hide in the dust from before the terror of the Lord, and from the glory of his majesty. The haughty looks of man shall be brought low, and the pride of men shall be humbled; and the Lord alone will be exalted in that day. For the Lord of hosts has a day against all that is proud and lofty, against all that is lifted up and high; against all the cedars of Lebanon, lofty and lifted up; and against all the oaks of Bashan; against all the high mountains, and against all the lofty hills . . . And the haughtiness of man shall be humbled, and the pride of men shall be brought low; and the Lord alone will be exalted in that day. And the idols shall utterly pass away. And men shall enter the caves of the rocks and holes of the ground, from before the terror of the Lord, and from the glory of his majesty, when he rises to terrify the earth' (Isa. 2.10-19). Luke's Apocalyptic Discourse (and Matthew's) falls opposite to the Noah story in the sidra, and it is perhaps not an accident that Isaiah's warning of coming cataclysm should be parallel to it also. For it has been the conclusion of the argument of this chapter that the oracles of Isaiah were in part arranged to give appropriate comments on the Law reading; and what more obvious than that the catastrophe with which God had overwhelmed man's pride of old should be aligned with the similar catastrophe foreseen for the future? Isaiah's 'day' would have its place alongside the day when Noah entered into the ark, and it would be natural that the synoptic accounts of the day of the Son of Man should be laid alongside also. Matthew draws, and Luke hints at, the Noah parallel: but the

general picture is closer to Isaiah, with the flight from the cities as men faint with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world, and the powers of heaven are shaken. Luke takes up the phrase 'that day': 'Take heed to yourselves lest your hearts be weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and cares of this life, and that day come upon you suddenly like a snare; for it will come upon all who dwell upon the face of the whole earth' (21.34 f.). The dissipation and drunkenness are in Isaiah also, especially in Isa. 5 and 28; and in the story of Noah, who planted a vineyard, and became drunk. The snare is in Isaiah too: 'Fear, and a pit, and a snare, are upon you that dwell on the earth' (24.17). Luke adds a further short apocalyptic warning as Jesus is on the road to Calvary, a section to be read during the Pasch, between the second and third Sundays of the year: 'Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never gave suck! Then they will begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us' (23.28 f.). In Isa. 3 the prophet pronounces God's coming judgement upon the daughters of Zion for their pride. He will smite their heads and lay bare their secret parts; instead of well-set hair they will have baldness, instead of rich robes sackcloth; and seven of them will take hold of one man in that day (3.16—4.1). The falling of the mountains and hills could be drawn from the passage in Isa. 2 that I have just cited, adapted to Hos. 10.8. The Lucan warning is certainly influenced by Mark 13.17, 'Alas for those who are with child and for those who give suck in those days!', but the presence of the Isa. 3 passage in the liturgical background would go some way to explain the intrusion of the renewed eschatological threat on the daughters of Jerusalem. After Easter, at Lection 5, Zechariah sees an angel in a vision in the Temple while offering incense. We have already seen the associations with the angels of Abraham's, and Gideon's, and Manoah's visions; but in each case these appearances took place in the open— by the oak, 'in the field'. In Isa. 6 Isaiah sees a vision in the Temple: the house is filled with smoke from the altar of incense,1 and one of the seraphim flies to him with a message. He cries out, 'I have seen with my eyes the king, the Lord Sabaoth' (slSov xotg 6<|>0aX.noti; uou, 6.5). The Temple vision and the incense are in common with Luke's 5th Lection; in his 8th Simeon sees the Lord's Christ before his death and says, 'My eyes have seen thy salvation' (slSov ol 6<J>0a^oi JIOU, 2 . 2 6 , 3 0 ) . 1

Kaiser, Isaiah 1—12, p. 75.

Isa. 7 contains the celebrated sign to Ahaz, 'Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold the virgin (f| napefevo?) shall conceive in the womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Emmanuel' (7.14). The 6th Lection in Luke describes the Annunciation: 'The angel Gabriel was sent to a virgin (nap66vo<;) . . . and the name of the virgin was Mary . . . And the angel said to her () And behold you shall conceive in the womb and shall bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus' (1.26, 31). Matthew expounds the Hebrew: Emmanuel means 'God with us', and the significance of the virginal conception is that God is the father of the child. Luke sets forth the implication of Mary's virginity directly: 'The power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God' (1.35). The phrase 'shall be called holy' is in common with the early chapters of Isaiah also:1 'The remnant left in Jerusalem . . . shall be called holy' (Isa. 4.3). Isa. 8 opens, 'And the Lord said to me, Take to yourself a scroll of a large new book, and write therein with a man's pen of the making of a swift plunder of spoils . . . And make me faithful men as witnesses, Urias and Zacharias the son of Barachias. And I went in to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. And the Lord said to me, Call his name Spoil quickly, plunder speedily'. When in Lection 7 John Baptist is born, his father Zacharias 'asked for a tablet and wrote saying, His name is John'. The LXX's T6po? is different from Luke's mvaiciSiov: but the similarity of the birth of a child of destiny, and the writing down of his name, and the two Zechariahs, combine to make the parallel rather notable. These are the only occasions in the Bible where the child's name is written down: the Hebrew has 'a large tablet' (gillaydn), which is nearer to Luke. Later in the chapter Isaiah writes, 'And if thou shalt trust in him . . . ye shall not come against him as against a stumbling block, or as against the falling of a rock . . . Therefore many among them shall be weak and shall fall . . . Behold I and the children which God has given me; and they shall be signs and wonders in the house of Israel' (8.14 f., 18). Luke seems to draw on these words for Simeon's prophecy over Jesus,2 'Behold, this (child) is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against' (2.34, Lection 8). John and Jesus were the children of prophecy, God's double sign which would be rejected by the men of this generation (Luke 7.28-35). Isa. 9 contains a number of phrases which recur in Luke 1—2: indeed, in many a tradition, and in many a Carol Service, the chapter 1 2

Italicized in Nestle. cf. Schurmann, op. cit., pp. 127 ff.

is the Christmas lesson. The LXX translation of 9.6 f. reads, 'For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder . . . Great is his empire, and of his peace there is no limit; it shall be upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to establish it, and to support it with judgement and with righteousness henceforth and for ever.' The fulfilment of this prophecy is put on the lips of Gabriel at the Annunciation in Lection 6: 'He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne o/his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there will be no end' (1.32 f.). The child is born, the son is given, at Bethlehem in Lection 8. The boy's birth is interpreted by Isaiah under the symbol of light: 'The people who walked in darkness behold a great light: you who dwell in a land in shadow of death, light shall shine upon you' (Isa. 9.2). Luke refers these words to the birth of Jesus at the end of the Benedictus in Lection 7, 'The rising from on high shall visit us, to lighten those who sit in darkness and shadow of death' (AT), and it is taken up again in the Nunc Dimittis in Lection 8, 'in the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles', where further passages from Isaiah have been glossed in. Isa. 9.1, the prophecy of Galilee of the Gentiles, was associated by Matthew (4.13-16) with the shining of the light upon the peoples in darkness; and we should perhaps note in this connection that Luke says that the Annunciation took place in a city of Galilee (1.26), and that Joseph went up from Galilee (2.4). The presence of a considerable number of references to Isa. 4—9 in Luke 1—2 seems thus to be plain; and although they are somewhat scattered between one Lucan lection and another, yet it may not be too bold to see four parallels as particularly striking. Isaiah's Temple vision (Isa. 6) has links with Zechariah's Temple vision (Lection 5); the Virgin Conception prophecy in Isa. 7 is fulfilled in the Virgin Mary's Conception (Lection 6); the writing down of the name of the prophetic child in Isa. 8 goes with the writing down of John's name (Lection 7); and the birth of the child to sit on David's throne is prophesied in Isa. 9 and fulfilled in Lection 8. Now it is precisely these four chapters of Isaiah which, on a mechanical division as given above, would constitute haphfardt 5-8, and would thus be read as prophetic lessons in the same weeks for which the Lucan lections were the respective gospel lessons. There is thus confirmation for the rather more speculative parallels I suggested between Isa. 1—3 and Luke 20 ff., and we should have the following pattern for the opening weeks of the Lucan year:

Isaiah, Luke and the Twelve

170

Luke 20.19—21.4 Scribes and Widows Luke 21.5-end Apocalyptic Nisan II Isa. 2 Discourse Luke (22—)24.12 (Passion) Nisan III Isa. 3 f. Daughters of Resurrection Zion Nisan TV Isa. 5 Vineyard, Woes Luke 24.13-53 Emmaus, Evening Temple Vision Iyyar I Isa. 6 Temple Vision Luke 1.5-25 Luke 1.26-56 Virginal Iyyar II Isa. 7 Virginal Conception Conception John's Name Iyyar III Isa. 8 Child's Name Luke 1.57-80 written written Jesus born Iyyar IV Isa. 9 Davidic Son Luke 2.1-40 born This forms an impressive series, with only Isa. 5 irrelevant to the Lucan readings. Isa. 10 yields no parallel to the story of Jesus aged 12. Isa. 11 f. opens, "There shall come forth a rod from the root of Jesse . . . and the Spirit of God shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and godliness shall fill him, the spirit of the fear of God'. We cannot avoid remarking that this text would fall in the week of Pentecost. It may be an accident that it is opposite Luke 3.1-20, which speaks of Jesus' baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire, and coincides with the feast which to Luke commemorates the gift of the Holy Spirit. But it may not. In the sidra, Joseph is said to have been a man in whom was the Spirit of God, none so wise, none so understanding (Gen. 41.38 f.), able to counsel Pharaoh, famed for his piety. Perhaps the Jewish tradition regarded God's Spirit in wisdom as a secondary theme of Pentecost—or even a primary one at an early period: so Luke would be taking Joseph and Isaiah as his authorities in turning it from a celebration of the Law to a celebration of the Spirit, following Paul.

Nisan I

Isa. 1

Worship and Widows Apocalypse

(iii) Isaiah and the Lucan Journey With ch. 3 ff. Luke is increasingly governed by earlier Christian tradition, and we find no more Isaiah references till New Year. Then, as we have seen,1 Luke follows Matthew in placing the answer to John in prison, 'The blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear' (7.22), etc.; which simply displays as fulfilled the New Year prophecy of Isa. 35.5, 'Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall hear; then the lame man shall leap like a hart, and the tongue of the stammerers 1 See p. 85, above.

shall speak plainly'. The healings of Luke 4.33—7.17 have all led up to this prophecy's fulfilment, and those in Luke 8—9 confirm it. Isa. 35 has had a determinative influence on the order of events in Luke, as in his predecessor. The healings had to be done by New Year, and they hardly are: Luke has to insert hastily the healing of many that were blind at 7.21 in order to quote Isaiah, 'The blind receive their sight . . . ' , at 7.22. There remains the mystery of why the fulfilment of the New Year prophecy should be associated with John Baptist, and to this we shall return. 1 Luke's Atonement story, the forgiveness of the woman who was a sinner, bears no relation to Isa. 37—38, and his Tabernacles parables, the Sower and matter following, too distant a relation to Isa. 40 to be expounded here.2 For the rest of the Gospel, there is only one Isaiah passage which we may have any confidence in seeing as influential on Luke. Isa. 61—62 falls in Week 50 by the mechanical division, and the passages which were fixed for the 50th week in the Gospel were Luke 16.14— 17.19, that is, Dives and Lazarus (with attendant matter), the Servant of All Work, and the Ten Lepers. The Isaiah passage is particularly significant, because we know that Luke thought its opening verses to be of cardinal importance. He cites them as the text of Jesus' inaugural sermon at Nazareth, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me, he has sent me to preach the gospel to the iraoxoTs, to comfort (jiapaKateaat) those who mourn' (Luke 4.18); and he opens his fullest statement of the gospel, the Sermon on the Plain, by blessing the poor and grieving, and pronouncing woe on the rich and well-fed. Now Isa. 61—62 is a pattern text for the Lucan doctrine of the reversal of fate. The poor and mournful in Zion will be given glory for ashes, the oil of joy for the spirit of heaviness, they will no more be termed Forsaken and Desolate, but Married and Sought Out; while the strangers and aliens, their erstwhile oppressors, will come and serve them. In the sixth century such a reversal was no doubt looked for in this life: but the prophet does say that everlasting (aldmos) joy shall be upon their heads (61.7), and that he will make an everlasting covenant with them (.8); and to an evangelist living at the end of time such promises must seem to refer to the age to come. So Isaiah's this-worldly peripeteia is transferred to Hades. The parable of Dives and Lazarus is about a Treats who received evil things in this life, but now is comforted (napaKaXetTai); while the nXoocno? who has lived sumptuously (cf. Isa. 61.6, 'You shall eat the strength of nations, and shall 1 2

pp. 245-8, below. cf. p. 260.

be admired for their wealth') is now tormented. The passage possibly also provides a solution to the long-standing difficulty that Lazarus is the only character in a gospel parable to be named. Isaiah continues, 'You shall be called the priests of the Lord, the ministers of God' (61.6). Lazarus is a Graecized form of Eleazar, and Eleazar is the archetypal priest, the ideal name for one who in the life to come is to be called the priest of the Lord. The second Lucan sub-lection is the parable of the Servant of All Work: 'Which of you having a servant ploughing or keeping sheep (dpoxpiffivxa fl noinatvovxa) . . . ? ' The echo comes from the same chapter: 'Strangers shall come keeping your sheep (jtoinalvovra;) and aliens shall be your ploughmen' (dporflpa;, Isa. 61.5). Perhaps Isa. 61 was so precious a text to Luke that he deliberately introduced material in fulfilment of it while letting the rest of IIand Ill-Isaiah go; or perhaps we should look for other echoes, especially in the Journey section from Week 44 on, where we have seen the influence of the sidrdt and Histories lessons to be strong. I append a list of such possibilities. The Revisers suggest a parallel between the opening of Lection 44, 'He fixed his face (rd npdaowtov fecrrfipiaev) to go to Jerusalem' (Luke 9.51) and Isa. 50.7, 'I set my face as a solid rock (orepedv irStpav). Perhaps Isaiah's axepEdv even suggested Luke's orniptCffl, a verb he is fond of, however. But Isa. 50 would fall on Week 40, a month early, if the chapters were divided evenly: not an impossible distance to be behind, but not in itself very likely. There is similar authority for comparing Luke 11.22 (Lection 46) 'When one stronger than him assails him and overcomes him, he takes away his armour and distributes (AT) his spoils', with Isa. 53.12, 'He shall divide the spoils of the strong'. Luke is interested in the Isaiah verse, from which he cites later in the Gospel, 'He was numbered with the transgressors' (22.37). The strong man comes in the earlier tradition; Luke has introduced the spoils. Isa. 53 comes on Week 42 in the mechanical division, still four weeks too early. Isa. 55 invites the thirsty and those without money to buy wine and fat without cost—'Why do you give your labour for that which does not satisfy? Hear me and you shall eat good things (dyaOd) and your soul (vuxfi) shall feast on good things' (Isa. 55.2). Luke's 47th Lections warn the Christian of the emptiness of money (Luke 12.13 ff.). The rich fool has much goods (dyaGd) laid up for many years, and said to his soul, 'Soul . . . rest, eat, drink, be merry'. But the disciple is not to concern himself with what he shall eat or drink, but make himself a purse that will not grow old. The echoes

are not very strong: Isa. 55 is in our 44th proposed haphfarah, three weeks out. Isa. 58 is concerned with the true fast, and with the faithful keeping of the sabbath. The true fast is not the form, but the loosing of every bond of iniquity (XOe JTDVTA O6V8ECTUOV ASIKIO?)—'Break your bread to the hungry and lead the unsheltered poor to your house: if you see one naked, clothe him . . . Then shall thy light break forth as the morning' (Isa. 58.6 f.). Luke gives particular attention to the poor in ch. 14 (Lection 48), 'When you give a dinner or banquet . . . invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed'. He sets these words in the same week as the synagogue service where the bent woman is loosed from her eighteen years' bond (XoOflvai (mb TOO SeojioO, 13.16). This looks stronger.1 Isa. 58 is in our 47th proposed haphfarah, only one week out, and carries the theme of true sabbath worship being shown in concern for the poor, as well as the particular phrase of loosing the bond of evil. Isa. 60 is on a happier note: 'Be enlightened, be enlightened, O Jerusalem . . . all your sons have come from far . . . the isles have waited to bring your children from far . . . and I will make you a perpetual gladness, and a joy (efxfrpootivri) of many generations' (Isa. 60.1, 4,9,15). Isa. 60 falls in the 49th week, alongside the Lucan readings which include the Prodigal Son and the Unjust Steward. It is to be noted that the former is about a son who comes back from a far country, and causes the fatted calf to be killed, and rejoicing (eu4>paiv£CT0ai). The Unjust Steward refers to Christians as the sons of light, a description not found elsewhere in the Gospels. The points are not very strong, but the fall of Isa. 60 on the 49th week, before Isa. 61 on the 50th, is virtually certain. In Isa. 63 God comes in judgement to trample the nations in his fury—'for the day of recompense has come upon them, and the year of redemption is at hand . . . The Lord is a good judge to the house of Israel . . . He himself redeemed them' (1-9). This passage is very likely to be for week 51, alongside Luke 17.20—18.14. In the first sub-lection Jesus foretells the destruction that is to descend upon the world as in the days of Noah and Lot; in the second, God is contrasted with the Unjust Judge—'and will not God perform the vindication of his elect who cry to him day and night, and he tarries over them?' (18.7). The last is more closely related to the picture of God as judge in Ecclus. 35, but that is not all there is to say in the 1

The pericope contains an even stronger echo of Isaiah, 'As he said this, all his adversaries were put to shame* (13.17), cf. Isa. 45.16, 'All of them are put to shame and confounded'; but this is much too early to be more than an unconscious echo.

matter. 1 Thereafter Luke rejoins Mark, and the possible Isaiah parallels give out. In the question of the influence of the Isaiah lections on the Lucan Journey narrative, the issue seems to me quite delicately balanced. In earlier chapters I have drawn the conclusion that there is widespread and determinative influence on Luke 9.51—18.14 from both the sidrdt and the Histories lessons; now I have noted the double Isa. 61 correspondence (the reversal of fates of rich and poor, and the servant ploughing and shepherding); so I am inclined to think that Luke would be looking for prophecies to see fulfilled, especially in view of the steady use of Isa. 1—11. But none of the passages is really cogent, and we should be involved in the additional hypothesis of rather short lections between weeks 31 (Tabernacles, Isa. 40) and 43 (Isa. 49), averaging 1.3 pp. of Biblia Hebraica, followed by rather long lections from week 44 (Isa. 50) to week 49 (Isa. 60), averaging 2.3 pp. The only thing to be said for such a suggestion is that the traditional consolation haphfarah which we noted to be out of order, and therefore possibly in its original position, is no. 47, Isa. 54.11— 55.6, which would fit exactly with the Isa. 55.2 parallel with Lucan Lection 47 noted above.2 Also, it is a common human tendency to go rather too slowly at any large task, and to have to speed up at the end. But even without them, the correspondences with Isa. 1—11, 35 and 61 seem to show that Luke was preaching, and later writing, his Gospel against a background of Isaiah haphfardt.

(iv) The Liturgical Origins of'The Twelve The Twelve (Minor Prophets) need not occupy us so long. They have one complication, however, which is lacking to Isaiah, in that they come to us in two orders. They consist of four triads: three eighth-century prophets, Hosea, Amos and Micah; three seventhcentury prophets, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah; three Persian period prophets, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi; and three somewhat elusive prophets, Joel, Jonah and Obadiah. The Hebrew and Greek orders concur in putting the seventh-century and Persian period prophets last, in the order given; they diverge over the placing of the elusive prophets in the first six. The Hebrew gives: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah. The LXX gives: Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah. The Hebrew seems to be an attempt to carry through the principle of chronological order. 3 Jonah is 1 2 1

cf. p. 210. pp. 172 f. Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 383; G. W. Anderson, CHB i, 140.

implied, in 2 Kings 14.25, to have prophesied in the reigns of Uzziah and Jeroboam II, the kings named in Amos 1.1, and is therefore placed in the Amos group, before Micah, who prophesied in the later reigns of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah (Mic. 1.1). Joel seems to be prophesying of the same events as Amos, who begins, 'The Lord roars from Zion, and utters his voice from Jerusalem' (1.2), with reference to 'the earthquake' (1.1). The same words come in Joel 3.16, and there is something similar at 2.10 and 2.30 ff. Amos's prophecies against Edom (1.11 f.) seem similarly to be echoed by Obadiah, whose whole book is given to this topic.1 So the principle underlying the Hebrew order seems fairly clear. Hosea and Amos prophesied under Uzziah (and under later kings in Hosea's case, Hos. 1.1); Joel and Obadiah are shown by their oracles to be contemporaries of Amos; 2 Kings implies the same about Jonah; and Micah comes in the following reigns. No such clear principle has been found to explain the Greek order; certainly the usual theory, that the prophets are cited in order of importance by the size of their books,2 is invalid, for Jonah is longer than Obadiah by a handsome margin—and indeed, on this view Zechariah ought to come first. It is difficult to think that the Greek order is an improvement on the Hebrew, whereas the Hebrew might well be an improvement on the Greek. The Greek order is in fact a lectionary order. The nine older Minor Prophets make a cycle round the year that neglects the autumn festival; with the Ezra reforms, the fourth-century community wished to celebrate New Year, Atonement and Tabernacles with suitable prophetic readings in the Minor Prophets series just as it did with the Isaiah series. In the same way that Isa. 34—35, with their message of the approaching day of Yahweh's vengeance, and his coming with recompense and salvation, were set aside for New Year, so the prophecy of Joel, with its message of Yahweh's Day in judgement upon Israel's harvest, its call for repentance, and its promise of overflowing threshing floors and winevats, both literal for Israel, and symbolic in punishment for the nations' wickedness, was set for New Year.3 In the same way that the Isaiah legends of Hezekiah's prayers for forgiveness were inserted into the prophet's oracles to provide suitable readings for Atonement, so the Jonah legends, telling of the preaching to the Ninevites and their repentance, were inserted for the same purpose. As the writings of 1

This explanation is decidedly thin; but then Obadiah gives the ancient exegete no more help than the modern one. 2 Eissfeldt, loc. cit., G. W. Anderson, CHB, i, 142. «> 3 cf. A. S. Kapelrud, Joel Studies (Uppsala 1948).

the eighth-century prophets are longer as a whole than those of the seventh century and the Persian period, Joel and Jonah came just about half-way through the cycle—of 66 pp. of text in Rahlfs's edition, Joel occupies the 30th-35th pages, just covering the halfway mark for New Year, half-way through the cycle; while Jonah occupies the 37th-40th pages, just beyond half-way, as Atonement is just beyond half-way through the Year. Obadiah was put between, to provide a reading for the sabbath intervening between New Year and Atonement. With the Twelve we are in a happier position than with Isaiah, in that there are some festal haphfardt in the traditional cycle drawn from the Twelve, with which to check any theories of this kind. Joel 2.15-27, the call to sanctify a fast, is still read on the first sabbath in Tishri; and the whole book of Jonah is still the afternoon haphfarah for Atonement, and has been since at least Amoraic times (b Meg. 31a). Furthermore, it is customary to read the last three verses of the book of Micah (Mic. 7.18-20) at New Year's tide, Micah being the book preceding Joel in the Greek order. The verses contain the words, 'Thou shalt cast (Tashlikh) all their sins into the depths of the sea': the verses are read on the first day of New Year by the bank of a river.1 There are thus three traditional readings from the Twelve in the Greek order at the season of New Year-Atonement to confirm the suggestion of an original lectionary cycle.2 In addition, a mechanical division of the following books would bring us to the early chapters of Zechariah at the time of the feast of Dedication, and the traditional haphfarah for the sabbath in Dedication is Zech. 3—4.7. It is very curious that there should be a haphfarah for the sabbath in Dedication, and not for the opening day of the feast; nor is there any relation between the themes of the passage—the vesting of Jeshua, and the lampstand vision—and the central topic of Dedication; the only connection is the lighting of the lampstand at the end of the sidra, Num. 8.1-4. It would be easy to understand the retention of the Zechariah chapter as haphfarah for the sabbath if it had been the reading from the Twelve on sabbath 40 or 41 (on which Dedication sabbath fell) in the earlier cycle. When the Maccabees instituted the feast of Hanukkah (Dedication), the sidra 1 2

The so-called Tashltkh ceremony. The verses are sometimes used as an additional haphfarah on the first or second sabbath in Tishri. Of the three seventh-century prophecies, Nahum is the best suited to Tabernacles with its clear message of God's judgement on Israel's enemies, especially since it is directed against Nineveh, and so is continuous with the message of Jonah. So Nahum follows Jonah; and all those who sympathized with the latter prophet sulking under his gourd had the pleasure of knowing that things came out satisfactorily the following week.

selected itself as Num. 7, since this was the account of the Dedication of the Altar in the Torah, and the only place in which the noun b"nukkah occurred.1 The short paragraph on the lampstand (Num. 8.1-4) does not belong with this at all, and is an evidently foreign appendage: the presence of the lampstand vision in the haphfdrah of the week would provide a motive for its inclusion. In this way we should have the lectionary proposal confirmed by no less than four readings from the Twelve in the traditional festal cycle.2 A fifth, approximate, landfall is the reading of Mai. 3—4 (one chapter in the Hebrew) on the sabbath next before Passover; the sabbath is called The Great Sabbath because of the words in Mai. 4.5, 'Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes.' The expectation of Elijah's coming at Passover is not ancient, and is likely to have arisen from the reading of this passage, rather than the reading from the expectation. In the old cycle as I am positing it, it would be read, of course, on the last sabbath in the Year, two weeks or so before the feast; it would be natural to move it to an even closer proximity when the old cycle broke down. Joel is a controversial book, but has long been suspected of being a 'prophetic liturgy' for the autumn festival.3 There are problems in the relationship of the locust-plague, described in the first two chapters, and the happy promises of 2.28—3.21 (3—4 in the Hebrew); and in the meaning, eschatological or otherwise, of the ambivalent phrase, 'the day of the Lord', in the book; as well as in the liturgical question. But the lectionary theory seems to provide a satisfying answer to all these difficulties. New Year was (and is) the opening of the penitential season: it is marked by the blowing of the shdfar; it is followed by nine days of penance culminating in the Day of Atonement, and thereafter follows the feast of Ingathering, Tabernacles. The soph'rim of the late fourth century would therefore find the oracles of Joel the son of Pethuel an ideal preparation for New Year; he had summoned the people to penitence in the days of a terrible plague of locusts, calling on them to blow the trumpet, sanctify a fast, and call a solemn assembly, with the priests weeping between the vestibule and the altar. Such repentance was needed year by year, even if the locusts were not always so disastrous. The 1 2

3

Num. 7 also fell happily between Tabernacles (cf. p. 23) and Passover (Num. 9). There are two other festal haphfardt from the Twelve, which were not part of the earlier cycle. Zech. 14 was introduced for Tabernacles because it makes express reference to the coming worship of the nations at the feast (14.16): Hab. 3 was brought in for the second day of Pentecost for its similarity to the theophany on Sinai. Kapelrud, Joel Studies.

day of Yahweh at the culmination of Tabernacles, which had always seemed the guarantee of Israel's vindication and salvation, seemed to Joel 'as destruction from the Almighty', 'a day of darkness and gloom', 'great and very terrible', the harbinger of famine. What more edifying warning could be given? 'Yet even now, says the Lord, return to me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning . . . ' So Joel 1—2 must seem God's gift for the week before New Year. But with the New Year feast itself, the mood changes. Surely God will hear Israel's prayer of humiliation. So even ch. 2 ends with Yahweh's jealousy for his land and pity for his people, with the promise of grain, wine and oil, the removal of the northern invader, and the restoration of the years the locust has eaten (2.18-27). The prose passage from 2.30—3.8 lifts the perspective to portents in heaven and on earth before Yahweh's great and terrible day comes—terrible now for the nations who have sold Israelites in slavery to the Greeks, and are to be massacred in the valley of Jehoshaphat, as the angels put in the sickle and tread the winepress overflowing with their wickedness. So Yahweh's day will be salvation for Israel after all. Jonah similarly seems designed for the liturgical position it holds. The book is in two halves which cohere. In the first Jonah tries to evade the Lord's command, is thrown from the boat and swallowed by the fish: in whose belly he prays, 'I called to the Lord out of my distress . . . ' The prayer of Jonah is analogous to the prayer of Hezekiah, also set for Atonement in Isa. 38. In the second half of the story, Jonah preaches to the Ninevites, whose king leads them in repentance: 'And the people of Nineveh believed God; they proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them to the least of them. Then tidings reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, and covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.' He decrees a fast for man and beast: 'Who knows, God may yet repent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we perish not?' (3.5-9). Jonah is disgusted by God's sparing of the city, and is taught the lesson of God's universal mercy by the incident of the gourd. Alone of major holy days, Atonement is credited from early times with morning and evening lections: Lev. 16 and 18, Isa. 57—58 and Jonah, in the Talmud. Jonah is much the longest reading in the traditional series, and was probably designed for reading in two parts, 1—2 in the morning, 3—4 in the evening. The message of the first part is the straightforward Atonement doctrine: Yahweh hears the prayer of the distressed which enters his holy temple, forgives and delivers. There is no need for the common hypothesis that Jonah's Prayer is secondary: it is the

climax and point of the first half of the book. The message of 3—4 is a marked extension of normal Atonement teaching: it proclaims that God forgives the sin of the penitent even among the heathen. This was a controversial gloss in the fourth century, but it was a gloss which Judaism accepted, not only into the canon, but into the liturgical citadel of Yom Kippur. There is nothing to be gained by supposing that Jonah was originally a 'tract' which was later adapted and put to liturgical use; there is no plausible setting in Jewish life for literary tracts. Jonah was a pair of haggadic sermons of a bold and attractive kind, preached on Atonement Day in the fourth century, and accepted into the cycle of the Twelve in the Atonement position. When the cycle of the Twelve was replaced by the present eclectic series, the position of Joel and Jonah seemed anomalous, and they were promoted to their supposed chronological order. I do not propose to say much else about the Twelve, but it is worth while to pause for a moment on Hosea. The oracles of the Minor Prophets could not bear much relation to the themes of the sidrdt in their order, but the men who set up the cycle of the Twelve had some little freedom in that they could have put Amos first, and perhaps had other options. Hosea, however, contains a number of oracles which take up the stories of Jacob in Genesis: 'In the womb (Jacob) took his brother by the heel, and in his manhood he strove with God.) He strove with the angel and prevailed, J he wept and sought his favour. J He met God at Bethel, and there God spoke with us'. 'Jacob fled to the land of Aram, there Israel did service for a wife, and for a wife he herded sheep'.

Gen. 25.26 Gen. 32.22 ff. Hos. 12.3 f., Gen. 28.12 ff. Gen. 28.5 Hos. 12.12, Gen. 29.20.

These passages did not escape the compilers of the traditional haphfardt-series, who set Hos. 12.12—14.9 (the end of the book) as the 7th prophetic lesson, the 7th sidra being Gen. 28.10—32.2; and Hos. 11.7—12.11 as the 8th, the 8th sidra being Gen. 32.3—36. This gives a reverse order, the 8th haphtarah being earlier in Hosea than the 7th. But the opening line of Hos. 12.3 actually provides a reference to Gen. 25, in sidra 6, so that the original series may have run: 6. Gen. 25.19—28.9 7. Gen. 28.10—32.2

Hos. 11.7—12.11 Hos. 12.12—

Hos. 12.12 is a foot-loose oracle, set by RSV in parentheses, which may have been transferred by 'editors' away from the other Jacob

sentences precisely so as to fit in with the Gen. 28.10—32.2 sidra. Some of the opening chapters of Hosea are very short, Hos. 3 having five verses, Hos. 1 and 6 having eleven verses, so that an arrangement of this kind is rather plausible, and opens up the interesting suggestion that the prophetic oracles may on a number of occasions have been ordered in such a way as to fit in with the sidrdt. Good instances of this would be Mic. 6.7-9, ' "Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" He has showed you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?', which would fall by a mechanical division opposite to the sacrificial laws in Leviticus; or the matter of uncleanness in touching the dead in Hag. 2, which would fall on the same principle opposite to the law on the same matter in Num. 19. But we lack firm means of placing the oracles so exactly, and as with Isaiah it is likely that there was no generally accepted division of the text: so that it is wise to leave the question open. Although Luke cites the Twelve a number of times in Acts, there is no certain reference to any of the Twelve haphfardt in the Gospel. The short opening Hosea chapters evoke the attractive possibility that Hos. 6.2, 'After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up', was a part of the third reading, and therefore fell each year on Easter Sunday; this would conveniently resolve the problem of the Church's insistence that Jesus was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15.4), without ever citing a Scripture which says so. The Mic. 6 passage just cited would provide a happy link between Lev. 1—5 and the Sermon on the Plain, all three falling on sabbath 24, but there is no verbal reference to Micah in Luke. The clothing of Jesus in resplendent garments in Zech. 3, at Dedication, fits well with the Transfiguration, but the theme is less developed in Luke than in Matthew and Mark. It seems best to say that Luke read the Twelve in church some years, but that the haphtardt on which he based his Gospel lections were those from the Histories and from Isaiah.

TABLE VII Isaiah, Luke and the Twelve ISAIAH TWELVE

SIDRA 1. Gen. 2. Passover 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Pentecost 10.

1—6.8 6.9—11

1 2

Hos. 1—2 Hos. 3—4

LUKE

cf. Isa. 1 Widows, Prayer Isa. 2 In that day Isa. 3 Daughters of Zion ? Hos. 6.2 Third day

Isa. 11 Spirit on Rod oi Jesse

12—17 18—22 23—25.18 25.19—28.9 28.10—32.2 32.3—36 37-40

3—4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Hos. 5 Hos. 6—7 Hos. 8 Hos. 9 Hos. 10—11.6 Hos. 11.7—12.11 Hos. 12.12—13

20.19—21.4 21.5-end 22—23 24.1-12 24.13-end 1.5-25 1.26-56 1.57-80 2.1-40 2.41-52

41—44.17

11—12

Hos. 14

3.1-20

13 14 15—16 17 18—19 20—21 22 23 24 25—26 27 28 29 30 31—32 33

Amos 1 Amos 2 Amos 3 Amos 4 Amos 5 Amos 6 Amos 7 Amos 8 Amos 9 Mic. 1—2 Mic. 3 Mic. 4 Mic. 5 Mic. 6 Mic. 7 Joel 1—2

3.21-end 4.1-13 4.14-30 4.31-7 4.38-44 5.1-11 5.12-16 5.17-26 5.27-end 6.1-5 6.6-11 6.12-19 6.20-end 7.1-10 7.11-17

?Mic. 6 Mercy v. Sacrifice

34—35 36

Joel 3(—4) Obadiah

7.18-35

Isa. 35 Blind, deaf, etc.

37 38 39

Jonah 1—2 Jonah 3—4 Nah. 1

7.36-end

40 41 42 43 44 45 46—47 48 49 50—51

Nah. 2 Nah. 3 Hab. 1 Hab. 2 Hab. 3 Zcph. 1—2 Zeph. 3 Hag. 1 Hag. 2 Zech. 1—2 181

8.1-18 8.19-21 8.22-5 8.26-39 8.40-48 8.49-end 9.1-9 9.10-17 9.18-27 9.28-36

44.18—47.27 11. 47.28—50 12. 13. Exod. 1—5 6—9 14. 13. 10—13.16 16. 13.17—17 18—20 17. 21—24 18. 19. 25—27.19 20. 27.20—30.10 30.11—34 21. 22. 35—38.20 38.21—40 23. 24. Ley. 1—6.7 25. 6.8—8 9—11 26. New Year 12—13 27. 14—15 28. Atonement a.m. 29a. 16 p.m. 29b. 17 f. 30. 19—20 Tabernacles 21—24 31. 32. 25—26.2 33. 26.3—27 34. Num. 1—4.20 35. 4.21—7 8—12 36. 37. 13—15 38. 16—18 19—22.1 39. 40. 22.2—25.9

Isa. 6 Temple Vision Isa. 7 Virgin Conception Isa. 8 Name on Tablet Isa. 9 Son born, Light

?Zech. 3 Jesus vested

SIDRA

ISAIAH TWELVE

Dedication 41. 25.10—29 42. 30—32 43. 33—36 44. Deut. 1—3.22 45. 3.23—7.11 46. 7.12—11.25 47. 11.26—16.17 48. 16.18—21.9 49. 21.10—25 50. 26—29.9 51. 29.10—30 52. 31 53. 32 54. 33—34

52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61—62 63 64 65 66

Zech. 3—4.7 Zech. 4.8-end Zech. 5 Zech. 6 Zech. 7 Zech. 8 Zech. 9 Zech. 10 Zech. 11 Zech. 12—13 Zech. 14 Mai. 1 Mai. 2 Mai. 3—4

LUKE 9.37-43a 9.43b-48 9.49-50 9.51—10.24 10.25—11.13 11.14-end 12.1—13.9 13.10—14.24 14.25—16.13 16.14—17.19 17.20—18.14 18.15-end 19.1-40 19.41—20.18

cf.

?Isa. 50.7 Face set ?Isa. 53 Spoils/strong ?Isa. 55 True goods ?Isa. 58 Bond, poor ?Isa. 60 Sons from far Isa. 61 Poor comforted Isa. 63 Good Judge

The sidrdt and the Lucan lections are as in Table III. Isaiah is divided mechanically, the eleven shortest chapters being joined to their neighbours: see p. 165. The Twelve are divided in the same way in general: but (i) the first two chapters of a prophet are joined where the content seems to require it, and (ii) minor adjustments of verses have been made to fit in with the traditional haphfarah in weeks 8 and 41. The references in italic coincide in whole or part with the traditional haphtardt in Table I: see pp. 67-9.

PENTECOST AND THE THIRD CANON I have now said as much as I intend to about the five Prophetic books. But in the post-exilic period Israel was developing a third canon, the Writings, partly from ancient matter, partly by innovation; and if what I have claimed for the Law and the Prophets is true, it is difficult to think that the Writings did not also grow to maturity in the matrix of worship. I have, indeed, already expounded this process for some of them, for Ezra-CNehemiah^Chronicles1 in the Old Testament, and for Tobit 2 and 1 Maccabees3 in the Apocrypha; but we shall need to attend to the liturgical origins of some other books in the third canon, both for the sake of the general plausibility of the theory, and for their use by Luke. Again it will be necessary to limit our commitment: this time I shall except the book of Psalms4 from discussion, not because it is without links with the Gospels, but because of the scope of the study. The history of the Psalter is of enormous fascination and complexity, and cannot be undertaken here; but at least, these days, I do not have to argue that it is a liturgical collection. If we begin, as we have hitherto, from traditional Jewish use, then we can add to the Psalter the five Scrolls as likely liturgical compositions. These five short books are read each year at given holy days: the Song of Songs at Passover, Ruth at Pentecost, Ecclesiastes at Tabernacles, Lamentations on 9th Ab (and the other three fasts connected with the Fall of Jerusalem), and Esther at Purim. In the case of Esther this arrangement is as old as the Mishnah, and the book would seem to be made for the occasion. The dates of the story coincide with the dates of its celebration; and it is hard to see how Purim could be celebrated without the recital of the events it purported to commemorate. The same is probably true of Lamentations and the 9th Ab. If a community is to bewail the destruction of its city, it will require a liturgy with which to do so, and Lamenta1

MLM, ch. 10; above, pp. 38-40, 70-2, 126-9. pp. 132 f., above. 3 pp. 132-8, above. 4 I suppose that by the first century A.D. the Psalms were used in an annual cycle from Nisan, like everything else. But the evidence for this is extremely sketchy, consisting in part in the concentration of Book I psalms in the Passion story, and in part in the use of the same in the Armenian lectionary (see below, p. 298). 2

tions is just such a liturgy. The fasts go back to the years following 586 B.C. (Zech. 7.1-7; 8.18 f.), and the five dirges of which the book is comprised are usually dated to this period:1 the second and fourth contain vivid references to details of the siege and fall of the city (2.7, 9; 4.17, 19 f.). Nothing is gained by positing a setting in life for the dirges as poems expressing personal distress which were later collected and used liturgically.2 Private poetry is an anachronism in ancient Israel. If Lamentations has been used as a liturgy for the fasts for time without memory, and its origin is contemporary with them, the natural supposition would seem to be that the two were connected from the beginning.

(i) Ruth For the other three Scrolls, the situation is not so plain. We can easily see, in the light of the connection of Solomon with Tabernacles as expounded above,3 why Ecclesiastes, 'the words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem' (Eccles. 1.1) should be used then. It is not so easy to show that this was the original purpose of the work, and discussion of this, and of the Song, I postpone for the moment. It is Ruth which shows us the way forward; for Ruth is not merely a harvest tale, suitable for telling at a harvest festival;4 it is confessedly an extension of the story of Tamar. At its close the people say to Boaz, 'The Lord make the woman that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah . . . And let thy house be like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bare unto Judah' (4.11 ff.); and the genealogical conclusion (whether or not it be a later addition is irrelevant)5 begins, 'Now these are the generations of Perez' (4.18). Pentecost is 1

W. Rudolph, Das Buck Ruth, das Hohe Lied, die Klagelieder (2e., Giitersloh 1962), pp. 187-99; N. K. Gottwald, Studies in the Book of Lamentations (London 1954), pp. 33 ff.; Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 504. 2 Eissfeldt, op. cit., hesitates between the personal and the liturgical view, but says, The genuineness of the feeling which is expressed in them does, however, make the first possibility seem more probable.' On this argument, Macbeth, not Shakespeare, wrote the speeches assigned to him in Macbeth. 3 pp. 129 f., above. 4 Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 482. 5 cf. Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 479 f., for the standard arguments against 4.17b-22 being a part of the original book: (i) The naming of Ruth's child as Obed bears no relation to the women's statement, 'A son has been born to Naomi': we should have expected him to be called Ben-No'am, or some such name, (ii) The name is given after the women's statement, which is introduced by le'mor. Normally in the Bible the name precedes such oracles, and this is always the case where le'mor is used, e.g. at Gen. 30.24. (iii) The motive for removing the name Ben-No'am is clearly to link the Ruth story on to Israelite mainstream tradition by making the child the grandfather of David, (iv) Boaz is not referred to at 1.1 or 2.1 as of Perez's line, which occurs as a surprise at

the 51st day after Passover (Lev. 23.15 ff.) and so the 65th day of the year. It falls thus normally between the ninth and tenth sabbaths of the year; and the ninth sidra, Gen. 37—40, includes the story of Tamar, Gen. 38. The ninth Histories haphfarah, 1 Sam. 1—3, is the story of Samuel and Eli. Ruth is a story based on these two tales, and other contiguous matter. It is set 'in the days when the judges ruled' (1.1), and there is a famine in the land, as in the days of Joseph, forcing Israelites, like Jacob of old, to go and sojourn abroad. A certain man of Bethlehem-Judah fares forth (cf. Judg. 19.1 f.) with his wife and sons, and they are from Ephrathah, where Rachel died (Gen. 35.19). He is called Elimelech,1 and he and his two sons, Sickness ('Mahlon') and Consumption ('Chilion'), all die, like Eli and his two sons Hophni and Phinehas (1 Sam. 2.27-36; 3.11-14; 4.11-18). The line is carried on through the posthumous birth of Obed, as through the posthumous birth of Ichabod. But Ruth is not herself on the pattern of Phinehas' wife, but of Tamar. Ruth and Tamar are both widowed before they can bear children. Naomi says, 'If I should say, I have hope, if I should even have a husband tonight, and should also bear sons, would you therefore wait till they were grown?' (1.12 f.). Judah said to Tamar, 'Remain a widow in your father's house, till Shelah my son grows up' (Gen. 38.11). It is upon a Levirate marriage that the future of both houses depends. But for neither is such a marriage an easy matter. Judah means to keep Tamar waiting for ever; Ruth must leave her people. Feminine guile is required as well as faithful determination. Tamar disguises herself as a harlot, so as to sleep with Judah; Ruth lies down by Boaz while his heart is merry. So both women are at last publicly vindicated, and become mothers in Israel; and the apparently irrelevant Perez comes to be mentioned twice. Tamar and Ruth thus become a pair in rabbinic literature,2 and occur side by side in Matthew's Genealogy. 4.12; the Perez genealogy in 4.18-22 looks as if it has been added in the light of 4.12. (v) Ruth was therefore an originally independent folk-tale. Actually, there is little force in any of these points. There is no evidence anywhere, in the Bible or outside it, for the idea that Ruth originally existed as an independent piece of oral tradition. The women's remark in 4.17b, 'A son has been born to Naomi', reads quite naturally as an inclusio with Naomi's cries of despair in 1.11 ff., 'Have I yet sons in my womb ...?', and is therefore integral to the book. No oracle-naming was ever in question. The mention of Tamar and Perez at 4.12 is similarly integral because of the similarity of the Tamar and Ruth stories. 1 The name recalls not only Eli but Ahimelech from 1 Sam.; Ahimelech's line was also nearly extinguished. 2 Ruth R. 8.1, par. Midr. Ps. 4.9; Midr. Ps. 116.9. See M. D. Johnson, The Purpose of the Biblical Genealogies (Cambridge 1969), pp. 169 f.

Gen. 38 and 1 Sam. 1—3 do not of course cover the whole matter. The author's motive is no doubt to justify intermarriage with the friendlier neighbouring peoples, on the side of Isa. 56.1-8 against Deut. 23.3 and Ezra. Its frequent Aramaisms site the book firmly in the fourth/third centuries. Boaz is selected from the forefathers of David as being the contemporary of the Judges.1 Moab is chosen rather than Ammon because of David's links with Moab, where he left his parents in asylum (1 Sam. 22.3 f.). Boaz permits Ruth to glean in his fields because of the gleaning law appended to the Pentecost section in the H calendar: "And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field to its very border, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest; you shall leave them for the poor and for the stranger: I am the Lord your God' (Lev. 23.22). Ruth's ultimate justification is that God made her David's ancestress, and this is shown by citing (4.18 ff.) a section of the Genealogy in 1 Chron. 2, which mentions Tamar also.

(ii) Job The book in the Writings most like to Ruth is Job: both of them tell of human faithfulness in adversity and of the divine reward ensuing, and both are in the form of novels, short stories with a central character and a happy ending. Now the name Job was believed by the translators of the LXX to be another form of Jobab, the king of Edom in Gen. 36.33 f., 'And Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead. And Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his stead'. There is a short appendix at the end of the LXX version of Job: 'This man is interpreted from the Syriac book as living in the land of Ausis, on the borders of Idumaea and Arabia: and his name before was Jobab; and having taken an Arabian wife, he begot a son whose name was Ennon. And he himself was the son of his father Zare, one of the sons of Esau, and of his mother Bosorrha, so that he was the fifth from Abraham . . . And his friends who came to him were Eliphaz, of the children of Esau, king of the Thaemanites, Baldad, sovereign of the Sauchaeans, Sophar, king of the Minaeans' (Job 42.17bc LXX). Pseudo-Philo also identifies Job with Jobab, though he differs from the LXX in some particulars. He writes, after describing the events of Gen. 34, 'after that Job took (Dinah) to wife 1

1 Chron. 2 gives David's genealogy from Tamar and Perez (.4). 'Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah' (.10) is the phylarch of the wilderness period (Num. 2.3; 7.12); so his son Salma (.11) will be of the generation of the Entry, and his grandson Boaz (.12) of the days of the Judges.

and he begat by her fourteen sons and six daughters, that is, seven sons and three daughters before he was smitten with affliction, and afterwards, when he was restored, (another) seven sons and three daughters'. Pseudo-Philo gives the names of the children, none of which is Ennon: 1 so there were at least two independent traditions in which Job was believed to be Jobab of Gen. 36. The names in the book of Job are largely drawn from this chapter. Genesis says of Jobab and his successors, 'These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before any king reigned over the Israelites' (36.31). Uz is mentioned in .28, and Job is himself patterned on Esau, with droves of camels, sheep and asses (Gen. 32 f., 36.6). Eliphaz is one of Esau's sons in 36.4, 10 f., 15. Bilhan in .27 may be another form of Bildad, and Zepho in .11 (LXX Eaxjxip) another form of Zophar: there is much change of the consonants d, r, h, n, w between Genesis and Chronicles. As for the tribes of the comforters, Teman is the son of Eliphaz in .11, 15, and the Temanites come in the same context as Jobab in .34; Bildad's home, Shuach, and Zophar's, Naamah, are not found in the Bible. So we would seem to have a matrix for the names of Job and his three comforters, and for some of their places of origin in Gen. 36, at the end of the eighth sidra. But the substance of Job's story seems to be drawn again from the ninth Histories haphfarah, especially the Song of Hannah. The worst of disasters in the ancient world was childlessness, because it cut off the hope of the future: and the story of Job is influenced both by that of Eli who was bereaved of his children, and by that of Hannah who had never had any. Eli's sons used to desecrate the sacrifice at Shiloh, and died for their sin: Job used to send and sanctify his sons, 'and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all; for Job said, "It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts" ' (Job. 1.5). But they died none the less. As Hannah said, 'The Lord kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up. The Lord makes poor and makes rich' (1 Sam. 2.6 f.), so does it befall Job. His children are killed by the great wind, and he responds, 'The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away' (1.21). But at the end of the tale, the Lord brings to life, raises up, makes rich: Job is supplied with a further family, and with wealth twice as great as before. His shrewish wife aggravates his unhappiness as Peninnah does Hannah's. But in the long run Hannah knew that the Lord 'raises up the poor from the dust; he lifts up the needy from the ash heap, to make them sit with princes and inherit a seat of honour' (2.8): and so is Job raised up 1

Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, 8.8, tr. J. Bowker, TRL, p. 310.

from the ashes where he sits (Job 2.8) to wealth and authority once more (42.10 flf.). 'The barren', she said, 'has borne seven' (2.5); and Job once more has seven sons (and three daughters). It cannot but strike us as singular that Job, in the prose framework, appears thus to be a midrash on two texts from the very same parts of the Law and Histories as Ruth—Gen. 36—38 and 1 Sam. 1—2. Perhaps, then, Job also began as a haggadah for Pentecost, filling out the hints of Jobab at the end of the eighth sidra by means of the verities prophesied by Hannah in the ninth Histories haphfarah. But although, as is often suggested,1 the prose framework of Job is probably earlier than the poetry, in its present form it assumes the poetry as much as vice versa.2 The mourners, for instance, arrive in 2.11 ff. and are confounded in 42.7-9. Now it would seem that the Hannah story has served as the inspiration just as much for important passages in the poetry as for the prose. The Lord's shutting of Hannah's womb (1 Sam. 1.5 f.) may lie behind Job's cursing of his day 'because it did not shut up the doors of my mother's womb, nor hide trouble from my eyes' (3.10). Hannah was in bitterness of soul, and prayed unto the Lord and wept sore (1 Sam. 1.10); Job spoke in the anguish of his spirit, and complained in the bitterness of his soul (7.11, cf. 10.1). Hannah's reproach, 'Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth' (1 Sam. 2.3) is the kernel of God's answer to Job. Her confidence, 'There is none holy like the Lord, there is none besides thee; . . . for the Lord is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed. . . . For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and on them he has set the world' (1 Sam. 2.2 f., 8), is expanded into the whirlwind sermon, 'Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? . . . Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. . . . On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone?' (Job 38.2-6). Hannah knew that the wicked should be cut off in darkness (1 Sam. 2.9), and God says to Job, 'From the wicked their light is withheld, and their uplifted arm is broken' (Job 38.15). She knew that the Lord would thunder in heaven and break his adversaries in pieces (1 Sam. 2.10); God asks Job who has made a way for the thunderbolt, and whether he can send forth lightnings (Job 38.25, 35). Those who made later additions to the Book of Job were also conversant with its background in 1 Sam. 1—3: Elihu is the name of Elkanah's grandfather in 1 Sam. 1.1. In view of all these links with Gen. 36 and 1 Sam. 1—3, a Pentecostal locus of development of the Book seems not unlikely. 1 2

Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 456. Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 462.

A liturgical origin at Pentecost would enable us to form a more plausible theory of the obscure form of the book than has hitherto been possible.1 The poetic part contains two complete cycles of speeches: that is, each of the comforters speaks twice, and Job replies each time (4—21). Eliphaz then makes a third speech to which Job replies (22—24), but Bildad's third speech is a mere five verses long (25), and Job's reply only thirteen (26), with a second part opened by a second introduction in a new form (27); and there is no third Zophar speech. There follow in 28—37 a number of passages which are widely regarded as later additions: the Wisdom poem of 28, the Elihu speeches of 32—37, and perhaps Job's renewal of his discourse in 29—31. Finally there are God's speeches in 38—41, themselves probably amplified. The problem has been to account for the petering out of the third cycle; for the contrast between the firm form of (3) 4—24 with the comparative formlessness of 25—37. Now, for centuries Pentecost was celebrated as a 24-hour feast. The mediaeval Zohar says, 'Therefore the pious ones of old used not to sleep on this night (sc. Pentecost) but they used to study the Torah and say, "Let us acquire a holy inheritance for ourselves and our sons in two worlds.'" 2 Ps. 119, one of the psalms traditional in Judaism for Pentecostal use,3 remembers the Lord's name in the night (.55), rises at midnight to give him thanks (.62), prevents the twilight (.147) and the night-watches (.148), and praises him seven times in the day (.164): the psalm would divide conveniently into three stanzas at each watch from sundown to noon, with a final stanza at 'first evening' (3 p.m.).4 The same eightfold scheme is 1

2 3 4

In fact my theory of a liturgical life-setting for Job, as for other O.T. books, is not really in competition with any alternative. Commentaries—Dhorme (Paris 1926, E.T. London 1967), Fohrer (Gutersloh 1948), Holscher (2e., Tubingen 1952)—are all content to speak of'the poem', 'the book', without any attempt at specifying the context in which such poetry gained currency; cf. also Eissfeldt's section on Wisdom Poems, op. cit., pp.124 ff. Comparisons with Babylonian laments (Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 469), Egyptian literary disputes (G. von Rad, 'Hiob xxxviii und die altagyptische Weisheit* Suppl. VT III (1955), pp. 293-301), speeches in lawsuits (L. Kohler, Der hebraische Mensch, Tilbingen 1953, pp. 158-63), Aeschylus' Prometheus Vinctus (W. A. Irwin, 'Job and Prometheus', Journal of Religion 30 (1950), 90-108), etc., do not supply the need. A circle of wisdom teachers (Eissfeldt, op. cit., p. 124, Fohrer, p. 333) is often spoken of, but how did their wisdom poems reach the public? In the same way as T. S. Eliot published The Waste Land, having it copied and sold to the educated? Or more like Prometheus, perhaps, recited in public at a religious festival? 'Emor, 98a. b Soferim 29. See MLM, pp. 185 f.

visible in Matthew's Pentecostal sermon, the Sermon on the Mount, expounding the eight Beatitudes.1 In the same way, if Job is a Pentecostal haggadah, we should expect an eightfold structure. At first, perhaps, the (prose) story established itself as acceptable sermonic matter; but then the demand emerged for a fuller exposition of the problem to take up the full liturgical day. The author adapted his story, telling the outline (1 f.), with Job's lament (3) and first dialogue with Eliphaz (4—7) at sundown. Job's first reply to Eliphaz is full of evening imagery: 'Like a slave who longs for the shadow . . . nights of misery are apportioned to me. When I lie down I say, "When shall I arise?" But the night is long, and I am full of tossing till the dawn . . . When I say, "My bed will comfort me, my couch will ease my complaint", then thou dost scare me with dreams and terrify me with visions' (7.2 ff., 13 f.). He then sets forth his argument, not without some excursions, in dialogues with two further friends, who are characterized as being (Bildad) less cautious than Eliphaz, and (Zophar) youthful and rash. He takes the argument through a second cycle, gradually drawing Job's strictures from the comforters to God himself. This gives him material for six sessions, running round to mid-morning. He will bring the work to its climax with God's reply to Job and the peripeteia, at first evening (3 p.m.); so he fills the midday gap by a third dialogue with Eliphaz. Eliphaz has been the chief (longest) spokesman from the start, and the dialogues with the friends now have a chiastic form, with Eliphaz first, fourth and seventh. He closes the seventh unit with Job's words, 'If it is not so, who will prove me a liar, and show that there is nothing in what I say?' (24.25): a challenge which is then taken up at the beginning of the final unit, 'Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind: "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? . . . " ' (38.1 f.). We thus have a credible account of those chapters which are most widely held to be part of the original poem.2 But still there was time to spare, and the apparent lacuna after ch. 24 was filled in by later reciters of the poem, first with a half-hearted third Bildad dialogue (25—26), which was then amplified (27); later with the Wisdom hymn (28) and other speech-material (29—31); and finally by the Elihu speeches. Those who recited and amplified the original poem often attained something of the sublimity of the original (27—31). 1 3

MLM, chapter 12. The integrity of chs. 38—42, and indeed of much of the early chapters, has been matter for dispute, cf. Eissfeldt, op. cit., pp. 456 ff.

(iii) Aramaic Daniel There is no other book of the 'novel' type in the canonical Writings; but there is a whole book of novels, albeit of a somewhat different tone, in Daniel. Daniel is a work in two parts: chapters 2—7, all of which, apart from the first three verses, are in Aramaic; and chapters 1(—2.4a), 8—12, in Hebrew, which provide an introduction and continuation of the Aramaic centrepiece.1 All the 'novels' are in the Aramaic part (2—6), except for the somewhat mild story in ch. 1. The main content of the Hebrew part is a series of visions (8, 9, 10—12), similar to the Aramaic dream-vision in ch. 7. The Aramaic section is distinguished from the Hebrew in at least five other ways: (i) The character of the Aramaic Daniel is active and heroic.2 Revelations of future doom cause him to bless God (2.19 f.), and to reject royal favour (5.17); at the worst he is reduced to temporary astonishment (4.19), grief and troubled thoughts (4.19; 7.15, 28). The Hebrew Daniel's activity is limited to abstention (1.8 ff.) and fasting (9.3); revelations of future doom cause him to fall in terror and prostration and trance (8.17 f.; 10.9), and to suffer fainting, sickness (8.27), loss of strength and corruption (10.8 f.), and finally dumbness (10.15). (ii) In the Aramaic chapters private revelations of the future are communicated in dreams by night (2.1; 4.5; 7.1); the waking vision at Belshazzar's feast is for all to see. In the Hebrew chapters the revelations are all made to Daniel in waking visions (8.1; 9.21; 10.1 ff.); a deep sleep falls on him in the course of the first of these (8.18). (iii) The Aramaic perspective of history opens with Nebuchadnezzar, and is large-scale and inaccurate;3 it holds the Medes and Persians to be different empires (2.39; 6.28; 7.5 f.), and has no place for Alexander the Great. The Hebrew perspective of history opens with Alexander's overthrow 1

The question of the unity of the book of Daniel is controverted; and of those who ascribe it to two authors, some divide it into stories (1—6) and visions (7—12). For various theories, cf. Eissfeldt, op. cit., pp. 517 ff., Fohrer, IOT, pp. 478 f. I give reasons below for taking the linguistic division to be primary, and suppose the Hebrew author not only to have prefaced the Aramaic stories with an introduction (1), but to have begun to translate the Aramaic (2.1-4a). With 2.4a, 'Then the Chaldaeans said to the king in Aramaic', he gave up, with reason. 2 I owe this point indirectly to the present Dean of Durham, the Very Rev. E. W. Heaton, whose comment, 'Daniel is not the man he was', was retailed in discussion after the lecture. Some of the other points in this paragraph may be found in his The Book of Daniel (Torch, London 1956), pp. 47-54. 3 e.g., there was no deportation in 605 (1.1 f.); Belshazzar was the son of Nabonidus, not Nebuchadnezzar (5.2); Darius comes later than Cyrus, not before (6.28). These and most other errors can be traced to misreadings of the Bible, which was the Aramaic Daniel's historical source-book.

of Darius (8.5; 11.3), and is detailed and on the whole accurate (8.8-12; 11.2-39); it knows the Medes and Persians to be a single empire (8.20). (iv) The Aramaic 'prophecies' reach their climax in Antiochus' war with the Maccabees (2.40; 7.7 f., 21, 23 ff.), and make no mention of the suspension of the daily sacrifice; but to the Hebrew writer (8.12-14; 9.27; 11.31; 12.11) this was the crux, together with the desolating abomination (in the same texts), which is also missing in the Aramaic section, (v) The doctrine of angels is relatively undeveloped in the Aramaic section. A 'son of the gods' is seen in the fiery furnace (3.25); a watcher, or holy one, bids cut down the great tree (4.13 f.); an angel shuts the lions' mouths (6.22); one standing by reveals the mystery to Daniel in 7.16. Named angels, Gabriel and Michael, feature only in the Hebrew chapters (8.16; 9.21; 10.13, 21), where they represent different peoples (10.13, 20), and fight against each other, and against men (8.10 f.), and talk between themselves (12.5 ff.). The combined force of these points compels us to follow the linguistic division, and to credit the two halves of Daniel to different authors; 1 the Aramaic half being the earlier. It will perhaps already have occurred to the reader that we do not lack a background to the Aramaic stories in the Pentecostal sabbath readings. For Dan. 2 is a pastiche, to use a modern term, a midrash, to use an ancient one, on Joseph at the court of Pharaoh in Gen. 41: and Gen. 41 is a part of the tenth sidra, which is read on or about Pentecost in an annual Nisan cycle. Nebuchadnezzar, like Pharaoh, dreams dreams that portend the future of his kingdom; his spirit is troubled in the morning, like Pharaoh's (41.8; Dan. 2.1, 3); he sends for his magicians, enchanters, sorcerers and Chaldaeans, as Pharaoh sent for his magicians and wise men (41.8; Dan. 2.2); he demands that they tell them his dream and its meaning, as Pharaoh demanded the meaning of his dream (41.8; Dan. 2.3-9); they cannot tell him, as Pharaoh's magicians could not tell him (41.8; Dan. 2.10 f.); Daniel comes forward through the mediation of Arioch, the captain of the guard, as Joseph came forward through the mediation of Pharaoh's butler (41.9 ff.; Dan. 2.14 ff.); he tells Nebuchadnezzar both dream and interpretation whereas Joseph told Pharaoh the interpretation only (41.25 ff.; Dan. 2.27 ff.); and Nebuchadnezzar makes him chief governor over the province of Babylon, and to be in the king's gate, as Pharaoh set Joseph over all the land of Egypt (41.39 f.; Dan. 2.48 f.). 1

There are (naturally) many points in common between the two halves of the book: see, e.g., H. H. Rowley, "The Unity of the Book of Daniel', HUCA, xxiii (1950/1), 233-73. These are to be accounted for in part by the community of background and spirit between the two authors, and in part by imitation.

Nebuchadnezzar's dream is about a great image, made of gold, silver and other metals. Now, the sidra for Pentecost itself, as opposed to the ninth and tenth sabbaths flanking it, which we have been considering, is the story of the Law-giving on Mount Sinai, Exod. 19—20.23, in the traditional series: and the last verse of this lection runs, 'You shall not make gods of silver to be with me, nor shall you make for yourselves gods of gold' (.23). Very likely the reading in earlier times went on well beyond this, perhaps to ch. 23 but in the same paragraph it is said, 'If you make me an altar of stone, you shall not build it of hewn stones; for if you wield your tool upon it you profane it' (Exod. 20.25). So just as false gods are symbolized by gold and silver, so is the worship of the true God associated with natural stone; and in the king's dream, the image which represents the heathen empires is finally overthrown by a stone cut by no human hand (Dan. 2.34, 45). The plot of the dream in fact has its closest parallel in the fall of the image of Dagon before the stones of the Ark of God; 2 this is described in 1 Sam. 5, a part of the Histories haph(arah for the tenth sabbath in the cycle. So the circumstances, the imagery and the plot of the dream in Dan. 2 are all drawn from the readings for Pentecost, or the sabbath nearest to Pentecost, the tenth sabbath in the year. The same idea of a golden image is the centrepoint of Dan. 3: Nebuchadnezzar makes an image of gold, summons his officers to its dedication, and bids all his subjects to fall down and worship it at the sound of a musical signal. Since the first commandment in Exod. 20 was, 'You shall have no other gods before me', and the second that no image was to be made or worshipped, Dan. 3 is, like Dan. 2, a sermon to a Pentecostal text, indeed to the Pentecostal text; for the story is about Nebuchadnezzar's idolatry, and the faithfulness of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to the first two commandments. This time, unlike Dan. 2, the worship of the image is the point. As for the burning fiery furnace, Nebuchadnezzar was famous for roasting alive those who displeased him (Jer. 29.22); and there is the proverbial wisdom that the Lord tries hearts as the furnace gold (Prov. 17.3; Wisd. 3.6; Ecclus. 2.5). The relationof these last texts to Pentecost will draw our attention shortly.3 Dan. 4 relates a second dream of King Nebuchadnezzar; and 1

1 have argued above, pp. 32 f., that the festal lessons for Atonement and Tabernacles were originally longer forms of the traditional sidrdt; and in MLM, chs. 13—14, for numerous references to the whole of Exod. 19—23 in the Sermon on the Mount. 2 See A. M. Farrer, A Study in St Mark (London 1951), pp. 251-64. 3 See below, p. 207.

again the Gen. 41 story has been influential. The dream made the king afraid (.5); he decreed that all the wise men of Babylon be brought before him to make known its interpretation (.6); the magicians came and he told them the dream, but they could not interpret it (.7); then Daniel came and explained it (.8 ff.). But this time the matter of the dream is the great tree reaching to heaven, whose fruit fed the whole world; it is cut down and its stump left. So is Nebuchadnezzar and his proud empire: it covers the world but will be destroyed, and he himself will be turned into a brute, till after seven years of penitence he is rehumanized and reinstated. The great tree is drawn from Ezekiel 31, in which Pharaoh is compared to a cedar in Lebanon 'of great height, its top among the clouds'; all the birds of the air made their nests in its boughs, and under its branches all the beasts dwelt; but because of its pride God bade it be cut down. Now Ezekiel's prophecy was delivered in the third month, on the first day of the month (31.1), the new moon before Pentecost; and there is considerable evidence that a part of the ritual of Pentecost in O.T. times was the hewing down of a tree, as the symbol of the destruction of heathen worship. The first description of Pentecostal worship that we have is the reform of Asa, as described by the Chronicler: 1 'When Asa heard these words, the prophecy of Azariah the son of Oded, he took courage, and put away the abominable idols from all the land of Judah . . . (The people) were gathered at Jerusalem in the third month of the fifteenth year of the reign of Asa . . . And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers . . . They took oath to the Lord with a loud voice, and with shouting, and with trumpets, and with horns . . . Even Maacah, his mother, King Asa removed from being queen mother because she had made an abominable image for Asherah. Asa cut down her image, crushed it, and burned it at the brook Kidron' (2 Chron. 15.8-16). The making of the covenant in the third month recalls the covenant of Exod. 19—24 (see especially 19.5-8; 24.3-8), and the oaths (wayyishshabh''u) the Feast of Weeks (shabhu'dth) or Oaths (sh'bhu'dth). In my reconstruction of the cycle of the Histories, as we have seen, the fall of the image of Dagon (Table V) comes on the tenth sabbath in the year. In my reconstruction of the Isaiah cycle, the section for the ninth week includes the oracle, 'Shall the axe vaunt itself over him who hews with it, or the saw magnify itself against him who wields it? . . . The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land the Lord will destroy . . . The remnant of the trees of his forest will be so few that a child can write them down' (Isa. 10.15-19). That for the 1

cf. H.-J. Kraus, Wl, pp. 58 f.

tenth week opens, 'Behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts will lop the boughs with terrifying power; the great in height will be hewn down, and the lofty will be brought low. He will cut down the thickets of the forest with an axe, and Lebanon with a majestic one will fall. There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots' (Isa. 10.33—11.1). So we should have a Pentecostal text from Isaiah current in Daniel's time, as well as a long-standing tradition going back to Ezekiel, to inspire the dream of the great tree of heathen self-glorification cut down by the action of God, and of the stump from which renewed growth can come in righteousness; and Nebuchadnezzar seems to refer to Isa. 10.15 when he says, 'None can stay (God's) hand or say to him, "What doest thou?" ' (Dan. 4.35). The association of Pentecost with the hewing down of the tree continues into the New Testament. The peroration of Matthew's Pentecostal Sermon1 includes the words, 'So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire' (Matt. 7.17 ff.). The passage in Luke which we have sited on Pentecost2 is John's preaching of the coming baptism with the Spirit: it includes the words, 'Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire' (3.9). Indeed, the association continues in Judaism to the present day: a part of the traditional observance of Pentecost in every Jewish home is the cutting down of a tree,3 like the Christmas trees of northern Christendom. Dan. 5 brings us back to Gen. 41 for the third time, and to Exod. 20 for the third time also. King Belshazzar sees the writing of his fate upon the wall, and his thoughts trouble him; he cries aloud to bring in the enchanters, the Chaldaeans and the soothsayers, and challenges them to interpret the writing; they cannot; Daniel is introduced by the interposition of the queen, proceeds to do the deed, and is exalted to be the third ruler in the kingdom. So here is Joseph before Pharaoh once more. But Belshazzar exceeds his father in blasphemous idolatry: he not only has his lords praise the gods of gold and of silver, of brass, iron, wood and stone; he has them drink to these idols in the golden and silver vessels which Nebuchadnezzar had stolen from God's temple at Jerusalem. So here is the most flagrant of all breaches of the first and second commandments. But this time the substance of the vision is that 1

See MLM, pp. 270 ff. p. 79, above. 3 Jewish Encyclopaedia, ix, 592 ff.: art. 'Pentecost'.

2

Belshazzar and his kingdom are numbered and weighed, and his realm divided to the Medes and Persians under the hand of Darius the Mede. Now, the only prophecy in Scripture of the fall of Babylon to the Medes comes in Isaiah, in Isa. 13, a passage which our division has set for the eleventh week of the year: 'The oracle concerning Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz s a w . . . Behold, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold. Their bows will slaughter the young men; they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not pity children. And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the splendour and pride of the Chaldaeans, will be like Sodom and Gomorrah when God overthrew them' (13.1, 17-19). The famous taunt-song from the following chapter derides the Babylonian king who has exalted himself to be like the Most High with his pomp and his harps, and now is destined for Sheol. So once more the Pentecostal Scriptures provide Daniel with his text. Perhaps he took the opening chapters of Isaiah a little faster than I have allowed,1 and read Isa. 10.33— 12.6 on the ninth sabbath and Isa. 13 on the tenth; or perhaps he was preaching in a year when the tenth sabbath fell on the 64th day of the year, 5th Sivan, and the eleventh sabbath was in the octave of Pentecost. Isa. 13.1 is itself suggestive for the variation which he wishes to make in his tale-telling. In Dan. 2 the king has a dream, told in the third person as in Gen. 41; in Dan. 4 the king tells his own dream in the first person; in Dan. 5 it is not a dream, but he sees the oracle written on the wall—compare Isaiah's curious expression, "The oracle concerning Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw'. God's warning of future destruction is also written in a four-word oracle in Isa. 8.3; and Hannah's Pentecostal Song also prophesied, 'The Lord is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed'' (1 Sam. 2.3).

The same two basic elements are also behind Dan. 6: the king thought to set Daniel over the whole realm (.3), as Pharaoh did to Joseph; and the statute is established that no petition is to be made to god or man for thirty days, save to the king (.7), thus setting the king once more in the place of God. This time the plot of the story is inspired by the ninth rather than the tenth sidra, Gen. 37—40, and by the Pentecostal psalm,2 Ps. 119. In Gen. 37 Joseph's brothers conspire against him to kill him; they cast him into a pit, and say that a wild beast devoured him; but he is drawn alive from the pit. In Gen. 39 f. he is in a dungeon from which he ascends by Pharaoh's command. The psalmist tells how princes sat and talked against him, but 1 2

See above, p. 165. b Sopherim 29.

God's servant did meditate in his statutes (.23); he spoke of God's testimonies before kings and was not ashamed (.46); he praised God regularly through the day and night (.164); the cords of the wicked wrapped him round (.61); the proud forged a lie against him (.69), overthrew him with falsehood (.78), and (above all) dug pits for him (.85); he prayed through the night (.55, .62, .147 f.), his soul fainting for God's salvation (.81), till his soul lived (.175); while the princes who persecuted him without a cause (.161) found that salvation was far from them (.155). The tone of Dan. 6, rather different from that of the humble revealer of mysteries in Dan. 2—5, is due to the slightly self-righteous wording of the Psalm. Daniel is plotted against by the presidents and satraps in his innocence, maintains his life of devotion despite them, is arraigned before the king and maintains his faith in God, is thrown into the lion-pit till morning, when he is delivered and his enemies meet their death instantly. The lions do not come in Ps. 119, but were to hand elsewhere in the Psalter: 'They open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring Hon . . . Save me from the mouth of the lion' (Ps. 22.13, 21), 'I lie in the midst of lions that greedily devour the sons of men' (Ps. 57.4). In Dan. 7 the preacher rings the changes by placing the dream in the mind of Daniel himself; and this time, as every commentator notes, the inspiration for the dream's story comes from Hos. 13, 'According to their pasture they were filled, and their heart was lifted up; therefore they forgot me. So I will be to them like a lion, like a leopard I will lurk beside the way. I will fall upon them like a bear robbed of her cubs, I will tear open their breast, and there I will devour them like a lion, as a wild beast would rend them . . . I have given you kings in my anger, and I have taken them away in my wrath' (.6 ff., 11). What the commentators have not been in a position to note is that in our cycle of the Twelve Prophets Hos. 13 falls on the ninth sabbath in the year, once more on the sabbath before Pentecost. The dream is of a succession of kings given and taken from Israel in divine wrath; the first is like a lion, Babylon; the second is like a bear, Media;1 the third is like a leopard, Persia; and the fourth, the wild beast of Greece/Syria, takes on in the prophet's imagination a hideous strength and barbarity. Indeed, Hos. 13 would seem to lie behind Dan. 2 also: 'And now they sin more and more, and make for themselves molten images, idols skilfully made of their silver, all of them the work of craftsmen. Sacrifice to these, they say. Men kiss calves! Therefore they shall be 1

Daniel likes steady progressions—gold, silver, brass, iron, etc. The bear is nobler than the leopard, and is therefore promoted to second place. Also Media, as a northern people, fits best with the Bear as a northern constellation.

like the morning mist or like the dew that goes early away, like the chaff that swirls from the threshing floor or like smoke from a window' (.2 f.). Compare Dan. 2.35, where the metals of the image 'all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away'; or John Baptist once more at the Lucan Pentecost, 'His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into his granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire' (3.17). The Pentecostal chapter from Hosea has provided the thought for evangelist as for apocalyptist, and for the latter in two meditations. Once the outline of Dan. 7 is fixed in a steady progression of ever more ignoble beasts, the climax is given in the representation of Israel's faithful as a human being, to whom the divine judge awards eternal empire. The contrast was a familiar one, as in Ps. 80, where the beasts of the forest ravage the vine of the son of man 1 ; and it follows the pattern of the descending metals of the image overthrown by the uncut stone. The discovery (if I may so call it) that the principal passages underlying the Aramaic part of Daniel all coincide with the readings set for Pentecost and the sabbaths flanking it cannot fail to add impressively to the coherence of the lectionary theory I am proposing, and hence to its plausibility. The forbiddenness of idolatry is the main theme of the Commandments, read in Exod. 20 on Pentecost itself and echoed in Dan. 2, 3, 5, and 6. Joseph in the pit and before Pharaoh was read in the ninth and tenth sidrot on the sabbaths flanking Pentecost, and provides the outline of the story in Dan. 2, 4, 5, and 6. The fall of the image of Dagon was read in the tenth Histories haphfarah, and provides the plot of the dream in Dan. 2. The felling of the tree of pride, and the new growth from the stump of righteousness, were read in Isa. 10—11, and the seeing of the oracle that Babylon should be overthrown by the Medes was read in Isa. 13; while we do not know the exact divisions of Isaiah into haphfardt, a mechanical division would set these passages between the ninth and eleventh sabbaths, and they are the prophecies governing Dan. 4 and 5. The figure of the man of faith, bearing his testimony before kings and plotted against by princes who dig pits for him, was in the Pentecostal psalm, Ps. 119, and provides the structure of Dan. 6. The blowing away of the idolaters like chaff, and the succession of kings like a lion, a bear, a leopard and a nameless wild beast, were read in Hos. 13, which is likely to have been part of either the ninth or tenth haphfarah from the Twelve; these oracles contribute to the picture in Dan. 2, and form the substance of the vision in Dan. 7. » cf. M. D. Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark (London 1967), p. 19.

The conclusion seems to be inevitable. The Aramaic part of Daniel was a series of haggadic sermons delivered at Pentecost in successive years from 175 B.C. on by a conservative Jew who preached (in some such place as Modin) loyalty to traditional Yahwism and resistance to the syncretizing policies demanded by Antiochus IV. The Law-giving on Sinai, and the story of Joseph at Pharaoh's court, were read every year on Pentecost and the tenth sabbath, and these stories have determined the form of most of the Danielic novels. The haphfarah from the Histories was read when Dan. 2 was preached, that from Isaiah when Dan. 4 and 5 were preached, that from the Twelve (Hosea) when Dan. 7 was preached. As with Ruth and Job, Pentecost was the traditional opportunity for the haggadic preacher, and his technique in all three works is the combination of the themes of sidra, haphfarah and other liturgical matter, into a story of religious appeal.

(iv) Hebrew Daniel The linguistic division of Daniel coincides with a liturgical division: the Aramaic chapters are all inspired by the lections of the season of Pentecost, and this is true of none of the Hebrew chapters. On the contrary, the liturgical setting of the Hebrew chapters is not Pentecost but Passovertide, and this is suggested expressly in the introduction to the final vision (10—12), which is dated, 'On the twenty-fourth day of the first month' (10.4), the only exact date in the book. 1 It is not difficult to suggest a process by which this could have happened. The Aramaic sermons were widely popular. They formed a rallying point for the loyalist part of Israel, and were preached over and over again at different towns. Pentecost was too limited an occasion for them, a feast with many competing liturgical traditions, only some of which we have noted. Soon they were collected and made into a series with the climactic lions'-den story as the last novel. The stories in the series were related to each other: for example, Daniel in the last verse of ch. 2 gives way to his three friends, who are then set to become the confessors of ch. 3; or Nebuchadnezzar's repentance in ch. 4 can be commended to 1

The other dates in the book all refer to one of the first three years of a wellknown king, and are plainly designed to give artistic verisimilitude. The specific nature of the date in 10.4 is underlined by references to 'three whole weeks' of mourning (10.2 f.), and 'twenty-one days' in which the prince of Persia withstood Michael (10.12 f.). Daniel's fast and the heavenly battle are understood as lasting from 1 to 21 Nisan, to the end of Unleavened Bread; the 24th Nisan is chosen as a day completely clear of the festival, on the analogy of 24th Tishri in Neh. 9.1 following Tabernacles.

Belshazzar in ch. 5. The dream-vision of 7, with its detailed representation of the horrors of Antiochus' persecution, and of the divine judgement, was set last of all.1 But a series of haggadic sermons required a series of liturgical days, which were available only in the two great feasts of Passover and Tabernacles. The logic of the Daniel stories sets them in Nisan, because the story of Israel's exile comes at the very end of the year in the Histories cycle, and the beginning of the turn in the nation's fortunes is told in the last verses of 2 Kings with Jehoiachin's release from prison, the last sabbath in Adar. The Chronicler had begun his cycle with the return of Sheshbazzar in Ezra 1 on the first sabbath in Nisan,2 and it was in Ezra-Nehemiah that the apocalyptist read the names of Daniel (Ezr. 8.2; Neh. 10.6) and his companions (Neh. 8.7; 10.2, 23). Also an important theme in 2 Kings 25, taken up in Ezra 1, is the capture and return of the Temple vessels, and these were significant to Dan. Ar - (Dan. 5.2). So it is natural to Dan. Heb to move the liturgical setting of the series to Passovertide in Nisan. He forms the pattern of the liturgy on the model of the celebration of the autumn festival in Ezra-Nehemiah. There he read of the celebration of Tabernacles (Ezra 3.4 ff.) and Passover (Ezra 6.19 ff.): the former consisting of (a) ten days of preparation (Ezra 3.6; Neh. 8.1-15), (b) seven days of celebration (Ezra 3.4; Neh. 8.16-18) with an eighth day of solemn assembly (Neh. 8.18), (c) a day of national fasting on 24th Tishri (Neh. 9.1), with a prolonged public confession of the nation's sins (Neh. 9.6-38), ending with (d) a renewal of the covenant (Neh. 9.38). There was a Passover analogy to the days of preparation in that the Passover lamb was taken on 10th Nisan, so Dan. Heb - supplies an introduction in which Daniel and his friends undergo a preliminary test of ten days of semifasting (Dan. 1). There were then to his hand the six sermons of Dan. 2—7 for the first six days of the feast itself, and he adds a seventh (Dan. 8) for the complete festival (15th—21st Nisan). After the octave he provides for a day of national fasting and repentance with the long confession of Dan. 9, closing with the revelation of hope at the evening oblation in Dan. 9.20-7 (23rd Nisan). Finally there is the closing vision of 10—12, dated in the text on 24th Nisan (10.4). The new material in Dan. 1 is modelled upon Ezra-Nehemiah as an established Nisan reading. Daniel is given the name Belteshazzar 1

2

There are some details in the interpretation which do not occur in the dream, and these have led to the suggestion that interpolations have been made in 7. But too much consistency should not be looked for in this style of literature. See above, p. 70, and MLM, ch. 10.

(1.7, introduced also at 2.26; 4; 5.12) in the same way that Shealtiel (Ezra 3.2, 8; 5.2) is called Sheshbazzar the prince of Judah in Ezra 1.8; the Temple vessels are brought in (1.2; Ezra 1.7 f.); and Jeremiah's prophecy of seventy years of captivity is re-expounded (9.2, 24 ff.; Ezra 1.1). There is perhaps also a hint of the Nisan reading of Genesis in that Babylon is said to be in the land of Shinar (1.2; Gen. 10.10; 11.2, sidra 2), and the chief eunuch Ashpenaz (1.3) may recall Ashkenaz (Gen. 10.2). The added vision of Dan. 8 is modelled on that in Dan. 7 with its animal allegory: it is given in the third year of Belshazzar (cf. 7.1). In part the material is taken from Nehemiah (T was in Susa the capital', 8.2) and Ezek. 1 (the vision by the river). But the text which has been central for the author's imagination is Gen. 15, in the sidra for the third sabbath in Nisan. There a deep sleep (tardemah, 15.12) fell on Abram, as Daniel falls into a deep sleep (nirdamti, 8.18; 10.9). Abram sacrifices a goat and a ram (15.9), and Daniel sees a male of the goats fighting a ram (8.6-8).1 Abram is promised that his people's oppressors will be judged after four hundred years of exile (15.13 f.), as Daniel is promised that Antiochus will be broken (8.26) in the seventieth week of years (9.24 ff.). But, Abram is told, 'the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete' (15.16); and Daniel's promise is similarly for 'the latter end of their rule, when the transgressors have reached their full measure' (8.23). The flaming torch which passed between Abram's sacrifices (15.17) soon becomes a symbol for the eyes of Daniel's angel (10.6). Such a series of references would be easily explained if Dan. 8 were composed for the sabbath in Unleavened Bread, the third sabbath in the year, on the basis of Gen. 15 in the sidra.

Daniel's confession in ch. 9 is formed upon Ezra's two confessions in Ezra 9 and Neh. 9. The former lasts until the evening oblation (Ezra 9.5), and itself reflects Joshua's fast and confession which lasted until evening (Josh. 7.6 ff".): hence Daniel's answer to prayer at the time of the evening sacrifice (9.21). Dan. 9.24 follows Ezra 1.1 in expounding Jeremiah's seventy-years prophecy (Jer. 25.11 f.), but this time the exposition is in terms of weeks of years (cf. Lev. 25). But it is Ezra's confession which provides the major model. Israel's guilt and God's justice form the common theme of the two long 1

F. C. Burkitt's suggestion, reported by F. Cumont, 'La plus ancienne g6ographie astrologique', Klio 9 (1909), 273, was that Persia was under the zodiacal sign of the Ram, and Syria under that of the Goat, and the symbolism was therefore that of the Zodiac. Unfortunately this just fails to be right. The rough he-goat is said to be the king of Greece (8.21), and is plainly Alexander in the vision, and nothing to do with Antiochus of Syria. Greece and Ionia are under the sign of Virgo; Cumont, art. cit., p. 265.

prayers. A number of phrases are in common, e.g.: 'From the days of our fathers to this day we have been in great guilt; and for our iniquities we, our kings, and our priests have been given into the hand of the ldngs of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, to plundering, and to confusion of face (AT), as at this day' (Ezra 9.7); 'To us, 0 Lord, belongs confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against thee' (Dan. 9.8, cf. .7). The end of the two confessions is described in closely similar terms in Ezra 10.1 and Dan. 9.20. Now, according to the reconstruction which I have proposed in Table II above, 1 Josh. 7 and Ezr. 9 both fall to be read also on the third sabbath in the year; so we should again have a liturgical background, for the same season as Dan. 8, from which Dan. 9 could have been developed. The revelation at the end of Dan. 9 begins a series of striking references to the early prophecies of Isaiah, especially Isa. 8; and this perhaps is not surprising, for in this chapter is foretold the coming of the king of Assyria, filling the breadth of Israel like a flooding river. Antiochus was king of an area similar to Assyria at its height, and similarly threatening Israel with extinction. The phrase used of the king of Assyria, 'He shall overflow (shafaph) and pass through' (Isa. 8.8 RV) is echoed in Dan. 9.26, when Jerusalem's end is to come with a flood (shefeph); armies are said to overflow at 11.26, to be utterly overflowed at 11.22, and to overflow and pass through at 11.10 and 11.40. The phrase 'a consummation and that determined' (Isa. 10.23 RV) recurs at Dan. 9.27. The vision in Dan. 10 is brought by an angel who touches Daniel's lips (.16; Isa. 6.7); and he says, 'By reason of the vision pains have come upon me' (cf. Isa. 6.5). Both visions include the desolation of Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, and both answer the question 'How long?' till deliverance comes (Isa. 6.11). Isaiah foresaw that when the king of Assyria came, 'many shall stumble thereon; they shall fall and be broken' (8.15). Daniel foresees that Antiochus III 'shall stumble and fall' (11.19); that many of the wise in Israel shall fall (11.33, 34, 35); and that in Antiochus' last attack many shall fall (11.41). Isaiah was bidden, 'Bind up the testimony, seal the teaching among my disciples' (8.16), and Daniel similarly is commanded, 'Shut up the words and seal the book' (12.4), and is told that 'the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end' (12.9). Isaiah vowed he would wait for the Lord (8.17), and Daniel is assured, 'Blessed is he who waits' (12.12). Isaiah foretold that God would make the land splendid (8.23 Heb.), and Daniel calls Israel 'the glorious' (8.9; 11.16, 41). So great a concentration from a single context in Isaiah 1

p. 70; MLM, pp. 215 ff.

requires an explanation, and once more the liturgical theory suggests itself. The vision is dated in the text for 24th Nisan (10.4), and follows three weeks of fasting (10.2 f.); it would be all too easy to divide Isaiah in such a way that ch. 8 was read at the end of Unleavened Bread, on the fourth sabbath in the year.1 In this way we should have a satisfying series of liturgical readings throughout Nisan: Nisan Nisan Nisan Nisan Nisan

II 15-21 III 23 24

Dan. Dan. Dan. Dan. Dan.

1 2—7 (Dan. A r ) 8 9 (Day of Contrition) 10—12

(Ezra 1) Gen. 15 Josh. 7, Ezra 9 Isa. 8

The loyalist provincial movement, speaking Aramaic, has now become a national movement, speaking Hebrew: but, as with the book of Ezra, it seems suitable to leave the Aramaic part in Aramaic, after a half-hearted translation attempt limited to the first verses of Dan. 2. The new preacher has the advantage of his predecessor in that he knows more history, not only being better educated (cf. the detailed knowledge in 11.1-20), but also living later (suspension of the burnt offering). He can thus devise a more complete ex post facto prophecy; but his predecessor has the advantage of him in being an artist. It is the novels and the dream of Dan. 7 which have become part of the heritage of mankind. So Daniel took its place at the beginning of the forming cycle of the third canon: Nisan II—24th Nisan IV—Sivan I Pentecost Sivan II—Elul

Daniel Tobit 2 Ruth/Job 1 Maccabees 3

It is especially in Nisan that we find the references to Daniel in Luke. The things that 'must take place' (Luke 21.9; Lection 2, Dan. 2.28) include the great tribulation (Dan. 12.1), and the coming of the Son of man on the clouds (Dan. 7.13 f.). Christ's Resurrection after 1

2 3

See above, p. 165. Such a division would have much to commend it. Isa. 4.5, 'The Lord will create over ( ) Mount Zion ( ) a cloud by day, and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night;...' recalls the Exodus. The song for the beloved concerning his vineyard in Isa. 5 echoes the Song of Songs for 'my beloved', the 'scroll' for Passover. Isaiah's vision in Isa. 6 is set alongside Abram's Gen. 15 vision in Dan. 10, and there are obvious links between Isa. 7 and Gen. 17 in the conception and naming of the child of promise: both Genesis passages fall in sidra 3. See above, pp. 132 f. See above, pp. 131-8.

three days (Luke 24, Lections 3 and 4) fulfils Daniel's prophecy of resurrection (Dan. 12.1 ff.), the only unambiguous one in the O.T.: the man clothed in linen was asked how long it would be till the end of these wonders, and swore that it would be in a time and two times and half a time (.6 f.). And the angel Gabriel, coming at the hour of incense to reveal the birth of the Lord's forerunner, and dumbfounding Zechariah (Luke 1.5-25, Lection 5) repeats the tale of Dan. 9—10, where the man Gabriel comes in a vision at the time of the evening sacrifice (9.21), foretells the coming of Christ the prince (.25), and strikes Daniel dumb (10.15).

(v) Proverbs Thus we have the outline of a series of third canon lessons running round the first half of the year: Daniel, Tobit, Ruth/Job, 1 Maccabees. The period from 350 B.C. to the end of the era was a time of flux for the Writings: new series were constantly being produced, competing for a position in the cycle after being well received at their first preaching. We have seen how Chronicles competed with the Histories for a place in the second canon, and was relegated to the third, like an unsuccessful football team. There it competed with the other forming cycle, as Ruth competed with Job for pride of place at Pentecost, and Daniel was taken from Pentecost by its Hebrew reviser and given a longer and less sought-after place at Passover. Inevitably this involved some loose ends, since there might be overlap or gaps: as when Daniel continues to the 24th Nisan, and Tobit begins on week 3, and there is no reading for Nisan I. We cannot tell how the ancient synagogue president solved such headaches, and I shall not speculate; nor shall I analyse all the remaining books in the Writings and Apocrypha, but limit myself to those of which Luke has taken some advantage. What about the second half of the year? We have seen1 how 1 Macc. closes with the peace of Israel under Simon Maccabaeus in phrases echoing the reign of Solomon, and how he delivers last words to his sons as David does to Solomon. The turn of the halfyear, according to our reconstruction of the Histories,2 was marked by the accession of Solomon, and Solomon's building of the Temple remains the traditional prophetic reading for Tabernacles to this day. Tabernacles presented itself therefore as a suitable occasion for sermons on the theme of King Solomon and his wisdom; and the soph'rtm of Israel had a large stock of wise sayings which tradi1 2

pp. 136 f., above. pp. 129 f., above.

tion associated with the King, the so-called 'proverbs of Solomon, son of David, king of Israel' (Prov. 1.1). The preachers did not, however, limit themselves to reciting these traditional m'shaltm; they composed sermons, or better, homiletic poems, with which to edify the people (Prov. 1—9). These exalted wisdom, as Solomon's great virtue, that men might 'understand a proverb and a figure, the words of the wise and their riddles' (Prov. 1.6)—like Solomon's proverbs in 1 Kings 4.32, and the riddles which he answered for the Queen of Sheba (1 Kings 10.3). The poems are on a limited number of topics. Wisdom is based on the fear of the Lord, and brings honour and wealth, peace and length of days (2; 3.1-10, 11-20, 21-35; 4.1-9): such were the blessings which King Solomon was given because he prayed for an understanding mind (1 Kings 3.9 ff.). Those who do not seek for wisdom are represented as men of violence, seeking wealth by force and guile (1.7-19; 4.10-19; 6.16-19). Wisdom is pictured as crying in the streets to the simple, and is contrasted with Folly, who is a prostitute (1.20-33; 8.1-21; 9.1-18). A subject of special interest is the peril of the strange woman (2.1619; 5; 6.20-35; 7): for Solomon loved many strange women (1 Kings 11.1), who brought about his downfall. There are a number of short didactic passages (e.g. 6.1-5, 6-11) which recur in the later chapters of the book, but as a whole Prov. 1—9 stand on their own as longer homiletic sections, based on Solomon's career and bearing his name, prefixed in the fourth or third century to the collections of proverbs in 10—31. We have no tradition of the use of Proverbs in the synagogue liturgy, but, as I have said,1 Ecclesiastes, which carries a similar title, is the traditional 'scroll' to be read at Tabernacles: and I suggest that the opening nine chapters of Proverbs were used similarly in the third and second centuries B.C., but were ousted by Ecclesiastes in the course of the latter century. In either case 'Solomon's sermons' were the order of the feast.2 But it is not really credible that the mass of proverbs in 10—31 should have been recited in such a context; they would have been quite indigestible. On the other hand, tradition has divided them into twenty-two chapters (10—31), and they close with an alphabetic poem of twenty-two verses (31.10-31); and there are 154 days, or twentytwo weeks, between the end of Tabernacles and the end of the year. This is only a conjecture, but it has a certain plausibility. 1 2

Sof. 14.3, cf. Elbogen, JG, p. 185. It should be noted that the theme of Creation, which was celebrated at the end of Tabernacles (see pp. 114, 262 f.) would coincide with the section, 'The Lord created me at the beginning of his work', in Prov. 8.

In its favour it is to be noted that there is only one passage in Proverbs to which Luke makes virtually certain reference. In Prov. 25.6 f. it is said, 'Do not put yourself forward in the king's presence or stand in the place of the great; for it is better to be told, "Come up here", than to be put lower in the presence of the prince.' If my conjecture is right, Prov. 25 would be read on the seventh sabbath before the end of the year, sabbath 48, with six chapters, 26—31, for the remaining six sidrdt, 49—54. The piece in Luke which echoes this is 14.8-11, 'When you are invited by any one to a marriage feast, do not sit down in a place of honour, lest a more eminent man than you be invited by him; and he who invited you both will come and say to you, "Give place to this man", and then you will begin with shame to take the lowest place. But when you are invited, go and sit in the lowest place, so that when your host comes he may say to you, "Friend, go up higher" . . . ' ; it falls in the 48th Lection of the Gospel.

(vi) Ecclesiasticus The only remaining book in which Luke shows clear signs of interest is Ecclesiasticus. Again, we lack external evidence of the liturgical use of the book, but the internal evidence is considerable. It is a major work, by the standards of the Writings, and its fifty-one chapters, even if we view the number with caution, might incline us to think of it as a complete annual cycle in itself, like the three major Prophets. This impression is strengthened by the last verses of the book, 51.23-30, in which the unlearned are invited to draw near and receive instruction; the whole work is designed to give such instruction, and it opens with the praise of wisdom, and thus reads easily as a continuous cycle, with the new admission class, so to speak, being admitted on the last day of the academic year. When would Jesus ben-Sira's year begin? Our studies earlier in this chapter would leave the date open, in so far as the Hebrew Daniel, Tobit and Proverbs all began at different points in the year; but it is clear that the Writings have a special connection with Pentecost in that Ruth, Job, 1 Maccabees and the Aramaic Daniel all began as Pentecostal homiletic works. It seems wise, therefore, to try Ecclesiasticus as a homiletic cycle beginning from Pentecost; and this hypothesis is easier to test than any theory about Proverbs, as it contains more considerable blocks of unified thematic teaching at the beginning and end, which could bear some relation to the Law and prophetic lessons. Ecclus. 1 is suitable both as a Pentecostal sermon, and to the

Joseph story read in Week 10. It is a poem in praise of wisdom, and wisdom is virtually identified by ben-Sira with the Law: so the festival of the Law would be well celebrated by the glorifying of the wisdom it came to bring. At the same time Joseph is a man celebrated for his wisdom and understanding (Gen. 41.38 f.), and benSira stresses the rewards of wisdom: 'She shall fill all her house with desirable things, and her garners with her produce . . . making peace and perfect health to flourish... He exalted the glory of those who held her fast' (1.17-19). From 1.22 the preacher turns to the wisdom of patience, and of not exalting oneself, virtues much displayed by Joseph. Ch. 2 is given to the expectation that the righteous will suffer: 'My son, if you come forward to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for temptation . . . Cleave to him, and do not depart, that you may be honoured at the end of your life . . . For gold is tested in the fire, and acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation'. Not only do we have a model sermon on the life of Joseph (until what God said came to pass, the word of the Lord tested him); we also have an 11th sabbath text for Daniel's companions in the burning fiery furnace. The theme of ch. 3 is the duty of honouring one's parents, and especially one's father; and what more obvious instance is there in the Torah than the piety of Joseph to Jacob in the 12th sidrffl 'Whoever glorifies his father will have long life, and whoever obeys the Lord will refresh his mother; he will serve his parents as his masters. Honour your father by word and deed, that a blessing from him may come upon you. For a father's blessing strengthens the houses of children, but a mother's curse uproots their foundations' (.6-9). Joseph honoured his father, establishing him with honour before Pharaoh and in Goshen, mourning him and burying him in Canaan; and Jacob blessed him doubly, strengthening his house in both Ephraim and Manasseh. Ch. 4 opens with an exhortation to care for the poor and afflicted; sidra 13 describes the oppression in Egypt, and it was a recognized duty in Israel to 'remember that you were a servant in the land of Egypt' (Deut. 5.15), and to treat one's inferiors accordingly. It is in the nature of the case that none of these four opening units yields a very confident result, though ch. 3 is rather impressive, and the accumulation is something; but so general a type of exhortation can always find several texts. Thereafter the matter is even less conducive to confident results. The preacher's mind moves hither and thither, luxuriating in the wealth of traditional wisdom of which he is the guardian. It is often easy to suggest a possible relation to the lessons for the day, as I shall illustrate; it is rarely possible to be conclusive.

It is not until ch. 38 that we reach another succession of longer units. 38.1-23 speaks of sickness and mourning; 38.24—39.11 is a laudation of the scribe; 41 is concerned with death; 42.15—43.33 is a hymn in praise of creation; 44 begins the praise of famous men, from Enoch to Jacob, and the line continues to Simon the high priest in 50, with the author's thanksgiving in 51. Now this clearly differentiated section would seem to confirm the hypothesis of a Pentecost-based cycle for the book. The concentration on the end of life, sickness, mourning, and death, and the author's signature, as we may speak of it, in the description of the scribe's life, would all be suitable for the end of an annual cycle, especially one whose last weeks were concerned with Moses' farewell and death, Moses whose teaching the scribe's care was to expound. The preacher seems to be drawing to a close as he writes (39.12), 'I have yet more to say, which I have thought upon . . . ' If Ecclus. 1 were the lesson for the 10th week, following Pentecost, then we should require nine readings, of about a chapter each, at the end of the book for the first nine weeks in the year; so Moses' death would coincide with ben-Sira's death sermon (41.1—42.8). Thereafter would follow Gen. 1, the story of creation, for which ben-Sira's creation hymn would be an ideal comment (42.15—43.33), and there would be eight chapters left for the remaining eight weeks. Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are named in ch. 44, for Week 2, whose sidra tells of Noah and begins the life of Abraham. Ch. 45 names Moses and the heroes of the desert; Week 3 is Passover week. Ch. 46 speaks of Joshua, the Judges, and Samuel; Joshua and the first judges were the heroes of the haphfarah for Week 4. So ben-Sira has texts in the lessons for the day to justify his praise of Israel's famous men through the generations. There were suitable readings in Isaiah (ch. 7) for the 6th week to cover the references to Hezekiah and Isaiah in ch. 48: in ch. 49 he returns to Enoch, Shem, Seth, and Adam, whom he left out at the beginning, and Joseph, whose birth comes in the 7th week. In ch. 50 he glories in the high-priestly splendours of Simeon ben-Oniah and the priests, and closes with apparent inconsequence with a gibe at 'the foolish people that dwell in Shechem' (.26). Gen. 34, in the 8th week, is the classic case of Shechemite folly, and tells of an earlier Simeon and Levi, whose descendants have now risen to high achievement. Such an outline is by no means secure,1 1

The insecurity is increased by the fact that the Hebrew order of the centre of the book is different from the LXX. It is possible that the ben-Sira cycle, like other Writings, was later taken from the first sabbath in Nisan. This would account for the untypical stress on sins, especially sins of speech, in ch. 23, which would be suitable for Yom Kippur, and for the Hymn to Wisdom in ch. 24, which would be suited to Tabernacles.

but it is a hypothesis against which we can test the Lucan references. Ecclus. 31 is a sermon against anxiety. The Revisers note a Lucan parallel to .3 ff., 'The rich man toils as his wealth accumulates, and when he rests he fills himself with his good things (RV) . . . Many have come to ruin because of gold; and their destruction has met them face to face'; Luke 12.19, introducing Luke's sermon on anxiety, tells of the rich man who said to his soul, 'Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years'. In ch. 3 we set Luke 12 opposite the Deuteronomic warnings on the perils of wealth in sidra 47, the eighth from the end of the year; so Ecclus. 31 would not be far away from its proportionate place if it were in the eighth unit from the end of a cycle that closed with ch. 41. We should have an interesting progression. The Wisdom writer preaches on the Deuteronomic text, of the rich man gathering his wealth, and taking his ease with his goods, and going to perdition; and Luke with accustomed skill turns the traditional homiletic figure into a parable. Ecclus. 32 opens, 'If they make you master of the feast, do not exalt yourself; be among them as one of them; take good care of them and then be seated; when you have fulfilled your duties, take your place.' The week following sidra 47 would be Week 48; and we have already seen that it is for this week that Luke writes his paragraph on taking the lowest seat at a marriage feast, with its evident relationship to Prov. 25. So, again, we should be seeing the preachers of centuries at work. Deut. 17 commands humility in kings; Proverbs 25 preaches humility in the court of kings, not standing among the great; ben-Sira preaches humility for the master of a feast, not exalting himself but taking his seat; Luke teaches humility, not exalting oneself, but taking a low seat at a marriage feast. Each preacher in turn applies the same basic teaching to his own social milieu, adapting the image of his predecessors. Ecclus. 33 contains a piece of ben-Sira's earthy common sense: 'To son or wife, to brother or friend, do not give power over yourself, as long as you live; and do not give your property to another, lest you change your mind and must ask for it. While you are still alive and have breath in you, do not let anyone take your place. For it is better that your children should ask from you, than that you should look to the hand of your sons. . . . At the time when you end the days of your life, in the hour of death, distribute your inheritance' (.19-23). The week after 48 is 49, and the 49th sidra contains the law of inheritance, whereby the sons of unfavoured wives are not to be disinherited (Deut. 21.15 ff.): ben-Sira's words would make a very apt comment on the clause, 'on the day when he assigns his possessions as an inheritance to his sons' (.16). I

suggested1 that in his 49th lection Luke's Prodigal Son was a parable which combined references to the inheritance laws and the law of the stubborn and rebellious son, both in Deut. 21; now we are in a better position to see why the parable takes the form it does—Luke sees Moses through the Sdph'rtm. Ben-Sira told the wise father not to part with his money till his sons could spend it without hurting him, and Moses told the parents to delate their boy to the village elders and have him stoned; but Luke knew of the foolishness of God who has put himself in our hands, and given us the inheritance to enjoy now; and who runs and falls on our necks in joy and forgiveness before our confessions are said. Two chapters on, in Ecclus. 35, comes the best-known Lucan reference in the book: 'The Lord is judge, and with him is no partiality. He will not show partiality in the case of a poor man; and he will listen to the prayer of one who is wronged. He will not ignore the supplication of the fatherless, nor the widow when she pours out her story. Do not the tears of the widow run down her cheek as she cries out against him who has caused them to fall? . . . The prayer of the humble pierces the clouds, and he will not be consoled until the Lord draws near; he will not desist until the Most High visits him, and does justice, and executes judgement. And the Lord will not delay, neither will he be patient with them, till he crushes the loins of the unmerciful and repays vengeance on the nations' (.12-18). Dear ben-Sira! He was a hard master and an insufferable snob, but he was a man of prayer, and he cared for widows and orphans. Two weeks from 49 brings us to 51, and it is in the 51st lection that Luke tells his parable of the widow and the judge (18.1-8); and there is no commentary which does not quote the parallel from Ecclesiasticus. In the 51st sidra Moses promises that if Israel turned to God, God would turn and restore their affairs (Deut. 30.1 ff.). A little earlier he had written, 'You shall not pervert the justice due to the sojourner or to the fatherless, or take a widow's garment in pledge' (Deut. 24.17); and the 51st haphfarah of Isaiah (Isa. 63) prophesied, 'The day of recompense has come upon them, and the year of redemption is at hand . . . The Lord is a good judge to the house of I s r a e l . . . He himself redeemed them' (.4-9). Ben-Sira sees Deuteronomy through the filter of Isaiah, and Luke sees both through the filter of ben-Sira. The judge, the widow, the crying out, the Lord's patience, the vengeance—all these words are from the Greek Ecclesiasticus: only to Luke the Church is the widow, and the naKpoOunetv is the delay before Christ's return, and the &c8ticiioi? will be Judgement Day. 1

p. 100, above.

Four strong correspondences like this, in order and with the right spacing, raise the presumption that Luke has been reading Ecclesiasticus round the year, like the Law, the Prophets, and the short books of the Writings. There may be other references. Perhaps the Lucan master's attitude to his Servant-of-all-work in the 50th lection has been influenced by ben-Sira's rather firm treatment of his servant in 33.24-end: 'Send him to labour that he be not idle . . . set him to work as is fit for him'. But Luke is an eclectic: he has no need to preach on ben-Sira's text every week. A more obvious parallel between the two books is Luke 5.39, 'No one after drinking old wine desires new; for he says, "The old is good" ', with Ecclus. 9.10, 'Forsake not an old friend, for a new one does not compare with him. A new friend is like new wine; when it has aged you will drink it with pleasure.' The Lucan verse falls in Lection 20, which would peg just about level with Ecclus. 9. Although they are not numerous, the Ecclesiasticus parallels are among the most striking and illuminating of those we have surveyed. They show the successive expositors of God's ways seeing them through their predecessors, like a man at an optician's seeing the letters through a series of lenses. What the lectionary theory does is to set the optician's spectacles in place for each letter, and the lenses in order; and we may hope that the net effect is to clarify the way in which Luke, as the man in the chair, looks at the Gospel story he is telling.

MATTHEW, THE O.T. CYCLES AND THE EPISTLE

I have already written more than five hundred pages about St Matthew, some half of which is given to expounding a lectionary theory of his Gospel;1 and I do not intend to duplicate that matter here. I am, however, in the enviable position of having now unearthed further evidence which confirms in a striking way the theory I argued earlier; for at the time of submitting the book for publication I had established only the festal cycle as the basis of Matthew, and the Torah cycle as the basis for Luke, and for the first weeks in the Matthaean year. I was still in part under the influence of Biichler's triennial cycle, and had not yet worked out any of the prophetic or third canon cycles other than Ezra-Chronicles. I was therefore unable to reply helpfully to friendly critics who asked whether, for instance, Matthew's formula-citations ('All this came to pass that it might be fulfilled . . . ' , etc.) corresponded with the reading cycle I had postulated; for I had hardly any prophecies located in my cycle. This lack we are now in a position to supply, for we have found evidence of the use of prophecies on given sabbaths in the Lucan church, and the same reading pattern, or something very close to it, must apply to the Matthaean church also. I shall therefore briefly recapitulate my conclusions on Matthew's liturgical year from the earlier book, and then inquire how far the prophetic and other readings for which I have now argued enlighten the Matthaean Gospel further. Matthew has a strongly marked structure, consisting of five blocks of teaching divided by series of story-pericopae. The themes of the five discourses correspond to the themes of the Jewish festal year celebrations, taken in order from after Passover. Thus the first feast after Passover is Pentecost, the Festival of the Law-giving from B.C. times:2 the Talmudic lesson is, as we have seen, Exod. 19—20.23, the story of Moses' receiving of the Commandments on Sinai;3 and the traditional psalms include Pss. 1 and 119.4 Matthew's Sermon on the Mount opens with an eightfold Blessing reminiscent of these 1 2 3 4

MLM, ch. 9 and Part n. cf. J. Potin, La File juive de la Pentecdte (Paris 1971), pp. 124-31. p. 67. Sof. 29.

two Psalms, and its central theme is the fulfilment of the Mosaic Law, and especially the Commandments, in Jesus' words on the mountain. The feast following is New Year, with its call to repent in view of the coming of God's ultimate reign: the feast casts its shadow before in traditional Jewish use, into the preceding sabbaths in the month of Elul.1 Matthew's second discourse is Jesus' charge to the Twelve to go out and preach that the kingdom of heaven has arrived (ch. 10); and this is followed in ch. 11 by Jesus' reproaches of this generation, and of the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent. Isa. 35, the New Year haphfarah,1 has been fulfilled as the blind receive their sight and the lame walk: such is the answer Jesus returns to John's question. The season of repentance in Judaism extends to the Day of Atonement, when Jonah is the prophetic lesson,3 and God forgives the sins of the penitent. Matt. 12 sharpens the tension between the Pharisees and Jesus, in the stories of the Cornfield, the Withered Hand, and the Blind and Dumb Demoniac: every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, they are told, but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. The Ninevites repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, a greater than Jonah is here. Atonement is followed by Tabernacles, the festival of harvest, Ingathering, an eight-day feast. Matt. 13 gives Jesus' harvest-parables, the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, supplemented by the Treasure, the Pearl and the Dragnet: the discourse breaks down into seven sub-units of teaching, and a closing paragraph. Three months later follows Dedication, celebrating for a further eight days the descent of the Shekinah on the Tabernacle and Temple, and the gathering of Israel in ultimate unity. Matt. 17—19 describes the Transfiguration of Jesus in the glory-cloud, and the laws which Jesus gives to Peter and the Twelve, upon whom the Church is to be built. It includes the parable of the Lost Sheep. Finally, there is Passover. Matthew prepares for Passover with two discourses, ch. 23 and chs. 24—25. In the first, Passovertide activities, such as the whitewashing of tombs, the reception of proselytes, and the payment of tithes, are drawn on to illustrate Pharisaic hypocrisy. In the latter the Church is commanded to be ready for its Lord's return, with the parables of the Thief, the Servant, the Bridesmaids 1

2 3

C. Pearl and R. S. Brookes, A Guide to Jewish Knowledge (4e., London 1965), p. 18, 'The first "Selichot" service is held early Sunday morning in the week prior to New Year'. In the Talmud it is maintained that the recital of the curses in Deut. 28 before New Year was a use going back to the time of Ezra, b Meg. 31b; see above, p. 46. See pp. 163 f., 84 f. b Meg. 31a.

and the Talents, and with the description of the Last Judgement. It is probable that the Church expected Jesus' return at Passover.1 In this way it is possible to account for the structure of Matthew's Gospel on the basis of an annual cycle of Gospels, in which the discourses have been developed as the Christian fulfilment of the themes of the Jewish festal year: Matt. 5—7 Matt. 10,11 Matt. 12 Matt. 13 Matt. 17—19 Matt. 23, 24—25

Sermon on the Mount Mission Charge, Repentance Forgiveness, Jonah Harvest Parables Transfiguration, Church Law Pharisees, Ready for Parousia

Pentecost New Year Atonement Tabernacles Dedication Passover

The two Passover discourses would be recited before the feast; the actual day of Passover would be given to the remembrance of Jesus' Passion, beginning from the Last Supper, and the following Saturday night to the Resurrection, and Jesus' commission to baptize, culminating in the actual baptism of catechumens. There are two lesser liturgical occasions in the Jewish year which also fit this pattern. One is the fast of 9th Ab, in memory of the Fall of Jerusalem, rather over half-way between Pentecost and New Year. The other is Purim, the celebration of the deliverance through Esther, a month before Passover. There are suitable sections in Matthew for both of these two occasions in the appropriate positions. In Matt. 9.9-17, Jesus gives warning that the days will come when his disciples will fast and mourn. 2 In Matt. 22.1-14 we have a Christian parable modelled on the book of Esther, with a royal wedding, a banquet, chamberlains sent to announce that the feast is ready, and the execution of the unworthy guest. The fasting story comes rather over half-way through Matt. 8—9, the Wedding Feast parable not long before the end of the story-series in Matt. 20—22; so both are correctly sited for liturgical use. We are not, however, reduced to guessing the distribution of the stories between the Matthaean discourses to the sabbaths between the feasts and fasts of a Jewish-Christian year. For the Gospel is subdivided in a large number of manuscripts of widespread prov1 2

See below, pp. 293 f. A. E. Harvey, reviewing MLM in JTS 27.1 (1976), 188 ff., criticizes this point as special pleading, in that it 'presupposes Jewish practices which are unevidenced before at least A.D. 135'; but in fact mourning at the fast of the fifth month is evidenced right from the beginning—'When you fasted and mourned in the fifth month and in the seventh, for these seventy years . . . ' (Zech. 7.5).

enance, including a variety of uncials,1 into 69 paragraphs: if we follow this subdivision, we find that the number of stories between the discourses corresponds to the number of sabbaths between the respective holy days. For example, there are seven sabbaths normally between Passover and Pentecost; and if we allow the Easter story for the first of these, and its octave, for reasons suggested above,2 we have five further sabbaths with five stories marked in the MSS (the Genealogy and Birth, the Magi, the Descent to Egypt, the Baptism and Temptations, and the Call of the Four). Eight further paragraphs are marked after the Sermon (which is a single unit) and before the 9th Ab for the eight or nine intervening sabbaths; and so on. So the incidence of the holy days is not a reconstruction at the convenience of the theorist; it is a datum which in every case fits the intervals of the calendar exactly. The units are set out in the large Table at the end of the book.

(i) The Formula-Citations The Matthaean Year is thus fixed, and we are in a position to read off the units of the Gospel Saturday by Saturday against the readings from the Law and Prophets (and the Writings) for which I have argued in this book. Such a cross-check should be instructive. For while we could hardly expect, for example, that every formulacitation of the prophets would be a citation from the haphfarah of the week—what modern preacher limits his citation of the Scriptures to those in the readings for the day?—we should certainly expect some correlation, and this is exactly what we find. I have already referred to a short succession of correspondences with the sidrdt for some of the opening weeks in the year.3 Thus the threat 'that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel', occurs in the Gospel for the first Saturday in the year,4 when the sidra was Gen. 1—6.8, including the story of Abel. Matthew's elaboration of Mark for the following week, 'As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man. For as in those days before the flood . . . ' (24.37-9) would be read alongside Gen. 6.9—11.32, the sidra called Noah, which is mainly given to the Noah saga. Easter and its octave do not 1

The early and widespread use of these divisions has been confirmed recently by the discovery of some fragments of a fifth-century copy of Mark in Nubia, in which they are marked; J. M. Plumley and C. H. Roberts, 'An Uncial Text of St Mark in Greek from Nubia', JTS 27.1 (1976), 34-45. 2 pp. 73 f., above. 3 pp. 49 f., above. * See Table VIII.

make reference to the following siclrdt, but the reading of Matt. 1 would coincide with the 5th sidra, the Life of Sarah, which concludes with a list of Abraham's descendants (Gen. 25.1-18): Matt. 1 opens with the Genealogy of Jesus, which is taken back to Abraham. This brings us to the first of the formula-citations: Matthew closes the lection, 'All this took place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the p r o p h e t . . . ' , citing Isa. 7.14. Now Isa. 7 is likely to have been read just about this period of the year. If Matthew followed the arrangement which seemed to underlie Luke,1 it would be read in the sixth week; if that which seemed to underlie Daniel,2 it would be in the third-fourth week. In any case Matthew wishes to portray Jesus as the seed of Abraham, and this is the last of the three Abraham sidrdt; so the precise date of reading Isa. 7 is probably irrelevant. The promise of Isaac's birth has been read in the third and fourth weeks of the year, and of Emmanuel's either then or soon after, and this leaves no real option but the fifth week, when Easter is over, and the genealogy of Abraham gave him the lead. Matthew's 6th lection, the Magi, provides a fulfilment of Isaac's prophecy in the 6th sidra, 'Let nations serve thee, and princes bow down to thee' (Gen. 27.29). There Esau, also called Edom, plans to murder the brother who is to supplant him in his place as first-born: here Herod, the Edomite king, plans to murder the infant king of the Jews. These texts provide the structure of the story, which is filled out from Isa. 60 and elsewhere. Matthew's 7th reading, 2.13-23, contains three formula-citations. Of these the first is Hos. 11.1, 'Out of Egypt have I called my son'; and this text falls, according to our Table VII, to be read on the 7th week of the year. Indeed, such an arrangement is almost unavoidable, since Hos. 11.7—12.11 is the traditional Jewish haphtarah for the 8th week, and this would enable Hos. 13 to be taken in the 9th week for Pentecost, as we saw with Dan. 7. The second citation is Jer. 31.15, 'A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they are not (AT).' This cannot have been part of a Jeremiah reading for so early in the year. It is a very singular verse to cite in view of the incident just described; for not only was the voice in Matthew heard in Bethlehem, not Ramah, but Bethlehem is in Judah, one of the Leah tribes, so that Rachel is not involved either. But the 7th sidra is the story of Jacob's coming to Haran, his marriages, and the birth of his children; and much of the tale is taken up with the grieving of Rachel for her childlessness. This would seem to provide 1 2

See p. 170, above. See p. 203, above.

some reason for the choice of Jer. 31.15: Rachel weeping for her lack of children is in Matthew's mind from the sidra, and the Jeremiah verse expresses this well to fit in with the children's death. The third citation is from Judg. 13.5, 'He shall be a Nazirite of God', with the 'i' lengthened to an 'o', as Rabbinic rules permitted,1 thus giving Matthew a text for Jesus' home town, 'He shall be called a Nazoraean, or Nazarene'. Judg. 13 forms part of the 7th haphfarah in the Histories cycle (Table VI), the same passage which was developed by Luke in his 5th and 7th lections for the conception and birth of the Baptist. Thus all three formula-citations are connected with the readings of the 7th week: one (indirectly) with the sidra, two from the alternative haphfardt, from the Twelve and the Former Prophets. Such could happen easily as the story was built up in the telling, year after year; and the coming out of Egypt suggests further texts in Exod. 1 (the slaughter of the children by Pharaoh) and Exod. 4 ('The men who were seeking your life are dead'). The manuscripts give a long 8th reading, Matt. 3—4.17, Jesus' Baptism and Temptations. The first part of this, John's preaching and the Baptism, are taken over from Mark, but Matthew has made two expansions, first to the Temptations story (4.1-11), and second with a formula-citation to justify Jesus' settling at Capernaum (4.12-17)—as well as a brief apologetic addition to the Baptism itself (3.14 f.). The Temptations are modelled on the temptations of Israel in the desert, which are dated in Exodus to the third week in Iyyar (16.1-30): as Matthew counted the 'Omer for fifty days up to Pentecost, and as he was about to draw an elaborate parallel with Sinai in the Sermon on the Mount, it is natural for him to take over and expand the Marcan Temptation story at this point, being the third week in Iyyar.2 As for Matthew's citation, 'The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, toward the sea, across the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—the people who sat in darkness have seen a great light, and for those who sat in the region and shadow of death light has dawned', it is a slightly adapted form of Isa. 9.1-2, the opening verses of the 8th haphfarah in Isaiah, according to our Table VII—again the reading for the day. Luke has adapted the second part of the quotation in the canticles of Simeon (Lection 8) and Zechariah (Lection 7). 1 2

MLM, p. 240. Jews to this day celebrate the 33rd day of the 'Omer (Lag ba-'Omer), 18th Iyyar, as a joyful respite in the period of semi-mourning. The origin of the break is unknown, being sometimes attributed to the end of the plague in the time of R. Aqiba—Pearl and Brookes, op. cit., pp. 25 f.

Matthew's 9th reading, Matt. 4.17-25, follows Mark in the Call of the Four and the healing of the multitudes; he does not cite any prophecy, for none is to hand that applies. But in his 10th, Pentecostal, reading, the Sermon on the Mount, it is different. The kernel of the Sermon is the antithesis of Jesus' teaching and the great commandments on Sinai, the readings for the day: the sixth and seventh commandments are cited exactly, and adapted versions of the ninth ('You shall not swear falsely . . . ' ) and tenth ('You shall love your neighbour . . . ' ) . 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' is from Exod. 21.24, from later in the Sinai Law-giving. After the Sermon, Matthew records a series of healings, which almost fill the interval between Pentecost and New Year; and something of the kind he must do, for it is healings which the Marcan tradition has passed on to him as the sign of the truth of Jesus' preaching that God's kingdom had come. Furthermore, New Year is the liturgical celebration of God's kingdom, with Isa. 35 as haphfarah, prophesying the healing of blind and deaf, lame and dumb, and Matthew will refer to this in its season. But in the meantime, it is his custom to justify each new departure in Jesus' life, his geographical moves and changes of policy, and he needs a text for the healings. As there is nothing suitable in the Scriptures read after Pentecost, he goes elsewhere—to the Hebrew of Isa. 53.4, 'He took our infirmities and bore our diseases' (8.17). This is a good illustration of Matthew's freedom in respect of his relating of the Scriptures to his topic of the day—a freedom far greater than Luke, or, as we shall see, than Mark. Matthew has structured his Gospel round the holy days of the Jewish Christian Year, and these can be made to fit exactly. For the rest, he is pleased to draw on sidra and haphfarah, especially when he has no Marcan tradition to guide him. There are some other occasions when the Old Testament readings have been an important influence on Matthew, in the half-year from New Year to Adar; but it will be less repetitive, and more instructive, to consider them in the next chapter, alongside their influence on Mark. I therefore postpone the remainder of the Matthaean Old Testament material, and turn briefly to the question of Matthew's debt to the forming corpus of the New Testament, the Epistles of St Paul.

(ii) The Origin of the Epistle To a large extent the origin of the Epistle, as a part of the liturgical reading pattern in the churches, is not a matter of dispute: the areas

of agreement and of doubt can be set out in eight propositions, to which I shall add, and argue for, a linking hypothesis: (1) Paul intended his letters to be read publicly at gatherings of the churches to which they were addressed: 'I adjure you by the Lord that this letter be read to all the brethren' (1 Thess. 5.27); 'When this letter has been read among you' (Col. 4.16). Not only is it likely a priori that such gatherings were liturgical services; but there are recurrent features at the beginning and end of most N.T. epistles, especially the mention of prayers, the kiss of peace, and the Grace at the end, which indicate a liturgical context.1 (2) Paul intended some circulation and interchange of his letters. Such a practice is presupposed by the address of a letter to 'the Galatians', whose churches were at some distance from one another; and is mentioned explicitly at Col. 4.16, 'When this letter has been read among you, have it read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you read also the letter from Laodicea.' It probably accounts also for the absence of Rom. 16 from some MSS. of Romans, which would have been more convenient for circulation without the personal greetings. (3) A number of factors made a collection of the Pauline letters inevitable after Paul's death. The apostle was held in high honour, at least in parts of the Church, and the more so after his martyrdom (1 Clem. 5; Acts 9—28); his letters were acknowledged as weighty, even by his opponents (2 Cor. 10.9 f.); the same principles for church life were valid everywhere (1 Cor. 14.33; 7.17); Pauline letters were so effective as teaching instruments that spurious letters were sent round (2 Thess. 2.2; 3.17); Paul left behind him a circle of disciples who had been in the habit of linking together the churches he had founded. 2 (4) Nevertheless, it is widely held that no actual collection was made until about the year 90, since Luke is apparently ignorant of the Paulines.3 Two possible accounts of this are offered. The older view, 1 2 3

G. J. Cuming, 'Service-Endings in the Epistles', NTS 22.1 (1975), 110 ff. A. von Harnack, Die Briefsammlung des Apostels Paulus (Leipzig 1926), pp. 7 f. There are many obvious points of tension between the Paulines and Acts, e.g. between Gal. 2 and Acts 15, or the absence of reference to the Apostolic Decree in 1 Cor. Nevertheless there are many points of contact between Luke-Acts and 1 Cor.: 1 Cor. 1.19—2.10 with Luke 10.21; 3.10 with Luke 6.48; 3.11-17 with Luke 12.47 ff.; 4.2-5 with Luke 12.42, 56 f.; 6.5-10 with Luke 12.13 ff; 7.34 f. with Luke 10.39-41; 9.4-7 with Luke 10.7, 14.26; 10.27 with Luke 10.8; 11,17 with Luke 22.24; 14.32 with Luke 10.20.

that of T. Zahn, 1 H. Lietzmann,2 and A. von Harnack, 3 is that there was a gradual diffusion of the letters in the generation after Paul's death, and that a first collection of ten letters was made in Corinth about 90. Corinth seemed likely, not only because the Corinthian letters stand first in the list in the Muratorian Canon, and in Tertullian,4 but also in view of 1 Cor. 1.2b, 'together with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours', which seemed to be an editor's intrusion generalizing the use of the epistle.5 The more recent view, that of E. J. Goodspeed,6 J. Knox, 7 and C. L. Mitton, 8 takes it that Paul's influence diminished after his death, and that the letters were stored away until their collection and publication by the author of Ephesians, which was intended as a covering letter for the corpus. Goodspeed writes, 'The old traditional idea that the Pauline letters leaked into gradual circulation is inexorably negatived by the ignorance of the Synoptists of any such literature. . . . The united testimony of Matthew, Mark and Luke puts the matter beyond peradventure; when they wrote, the letters of Paul had disappeared from Christian consciousness. Certainly some of them existed in old files, or church chests, but they were not present to the current life and thought of the church from A.D. 65 to 90. They were forgotten'. 9 (5) All ten Paulines were increasingly known and used over the next half-century, and the same is soon true of the three Pastorals. The extent of such presumed knowledge and use varies with the criteria employed. Mitton 10 and Schmithals,11 for example, relying on echoes and indirect references, think that six or more of the Paulines were 1

Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons (Erlangen 1888), i, 811-36. Die Briefe des Apostels Paulus, i: An die Romer (2e., Tubingen 1919), pp. 1 ff. See p. 219, n. 2, above. 4 Adv. Marcionem, iv, 5; De Praescr. Haer., 36. 5 Harnack, op. cit., p. 9, cf. Zahn, op. cit., p. 836. 6 An Introduction to the New Testament (Chicago 1937), pp. 210-39. ''Philemon among the Letters of Paul (London I960); Marcion and the New Testament (Chicago 1942). 8 The Formation of the Pauline Corpus of Letters (London 1955). 9 New Chapters in New Testament Study (New York 1937), p. 63. 10 op. cit., pp. 30 ff. 11 W. Schmithals, 'On the Composition and Earliest Collection of the Major Epistles of Paul', in Paul and the Gnostics (New York 1972), pp. 239-74; the English translation of Die Gnosis in Korinth (Gottingen 1956; 2e., Hamburg 1965). 2 3

known to each of the following: Revelation, Hebrews, 1 Clement, 1 Peter, Ignatius, Polycarp, John, James, the Pastorals, and 2 Peter. W. Bauer, relying solely on quotation, thinks that only 1 Cor. was widely known in the first half of the second century.1 The Oxford Committee2 provided a table graded from A (certain) to D (possible), for Barnabas, the Didache, 1 Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Hermas, and 2 Clement: the most extensive knowledge is credited to Polycarp with (A) 1 Cor.; (B) Rom., 2 Cor., Gal., Eph., Phil., 2 Thess., and 1 & 2 Tim.; and (C) Col.; whereas Ignatius is thought to have had knowledge of (A) 1 Cor.; (B) Eph.; (C) Rom., 2 Cor., Gal., Phil., and the Pastorals; (D) Col., Philemon, and 1 & 2 Thess. (6) It is probable that such knowledge was familiar from liturgical use in church.3 Clement of Rome bids the Corinthians 'take up the epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle'—1 Corinthians—'What did he write first to you in the beginning of the Gospel?' (1 Clem. 47). Ignatius says, inaccurately, that Paul mentions the Ephesians 'in every letter' (Eph. 12.2). Although neither reference specifies a liturgical context for such familiarity with the Apostle's writings, such is likely from other hints that we have. Paul was spoken of as 'scripture' by Basilides and Polycarp,4 and is coupled with 'the other scriptures' (2 Pet. 3.16). Liturgical reading of authoritative letters is implied by Polycarp (13.2) of the Ignatian collection, and is stated by Dionysius of Corinth to be his church's practice with 1 Clement.5 The process by which the Pauline Epistles became part of the Canon in the second century is comprehensible only on the basis that they already had para-canonical status in the liturgy alongside the Old Testament. (7) Marcion made the move to form a Pauline canon of ten epistles, and the Church followed him in the following generation, with a canon first of ten and later of thirteen letters.6 The order in which the 1

Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (Tubingen 1934, 2e., E.T. 1972), pp. 212-28. 2 TTie Oxford Society for Historical Theology, The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford 1905). 3 Harnack, op. cit., p. 10 f.; von Campenhausen, FCB, pp. 143 f. 4 Hippolytus, Ref. vii. 25.3. See R. M. Grant, "The New Testament Canon', in P. R. Ackroyd & C. F. Evans, The Cambridge History of the Bible, i, 293; but von Campenhausen, FCB, p. 145, n. 195, says that this is not safe. Polycarp calls Ephesians 'scripturae' at 12.1. 5 Eusebius, H.E., iv.23.11. 6 Harnack, op. cit., pp. 17 ff., von Campenhausen, FCB, pp. 143-6, 176 ff.

222

Matthew, the O.T. Cycles and the Epistle

epistles stand varies slightly in the early authorities: Muratorian Canon

Tertullian

Marcion

1 & 2 Cor. 1 & 2 Cor. Gal. 1 &2 Gal. Eph. Cor. Rom. Phil. Phil. 1 & 2 Thess. 1 & 2 Col. Thess. Eph. Gal. Eph. 1 &2 Col. (Col.?) Thess. Phil. Rom. Rom. Philemon

p46 Rom. Heb.

Codex Clarom.

Rom. 1 &2 Cor. 1 & 2 Cor. Gal. Eph. Eph.

Gal. Phil. Col.

Athanasius1

Rom. 1 &2 Cor. Gal. Eph.

(Phil.) Phil. (1 & 2 Col. Thess.) Pastorals 1 & 2 Thess. Col. Heb.

(Philemon?) Philemon 1 (& 2 Thess.) (Philemon) Philemon Philemon, Pastorals There is no agreed explanation of this variety. It is probable that a canon of seven letters was at first sought after, as being symbolic of the total unity of the Church; 2 and this could be done by counting 1 & 2 Cor., and 1 & 2 Thess. as single letters (omitting Philemon, or taking it with Col., or some other letter). Theories of an order based on the length of the letters are often proposed, but in every instance supplementary hypotheses are required.3 It is to be noted that p46 testifies to something close to the biblical order already in the second century. (8) Wherever the Epistle is found in early liturgical use, it occurs in a form showing traces of still earlier use in an annual cycle. The Nestorian use, as exemplified from the Upper Monastery at Mosul,4 shows many signs of primitive use; for example, it retains readings 1

Table from Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics, p. 254. Murat. Canon, lines 54 ff. For other authorities and comments, cf. von Campenhausen, FCB, p. 252. ' e.g., C. L. Mitton, op. cit., p. 62, 'The length of the epistles seems to have influenced their order from the first. In our New Testament, apart from one small exception, the sequence runs smoothly from the longest to the shortest.' The small exception is that Ephesians is half a page of Greek text longer than Galatians. Larger exceptions are, as Mitton has already argued (pp. 33, 63 ff.), that Corinthians and Thessalonians were at first counted as single letters. There would be still larger exceptions if our New Testament order (first testified in Athanasius' 39th Festal Letter) were not observed 'from the first'. 4 A. Baumstark, Nichtevangelische syrische Perikopenordnungen des ersten Jahrtausends (Miinster 1921), pp. 11 ff., A. J. Maclean, East Syrian Daily Offices (London 1894). 2

from the Law and Prophets, but, following the later use of the synagogue, not from the Writings, and in the Epistle cycle the Catholic epistles make no appearance. 1 Romans is read in lectio continua through Lent, alongside Genesis and Joshua, the first books of the Law and of the Prophets respectively; and for eighteen Sundays after Pentecost there are lections in broken lectio continua, almost in order, from 1 Cor., 2 Cor., 1 Thess., 2 Thess., and Phil.2 Hebrews, Col., Eph., and Gal., are drawn upon for Holy Week, Epiphanytide, Easter Week, Eastertide, and Advent. In the Byzantine rite 3 Acts is read in virtual series, through the weeks from Easter to Pentecost; then Romans from the sabbath after Pentecost, 1 Cor. from the 9th Sunday after Pentecost, 2 Cor. from the 16th Sunday, and so on round to 2 Thess. in the 31st week of the cycle. Timothy and Titus then follow, and Hebrews through Lent. There are traces of the same cycle even in the Book of Common Prayer. In the successive weeks from the Sixth Sunday after Trinity, the Epistles are taken from the following chapters: Rom. 6, Rom. 6, Rom. 8, 1 Cor. 10, 1 Cor. 12, 1 Cor. 15, 2 Cor. 3, Gal. 3, Gal. 5, Gal. 6, Eph. 3, Eph. 4, 1 Cor. 1 (Embertide), Eph. 4, Eph. 5, Eph. 6, Phil. 1, Phil. 3, Col. 1. These readings were taken over, largely as they stand, from the preReformation Sarum rite, which in turn goes back in substance to the Roman lectionary as adopted in the sixth and seventh centuries; and this itself shows traces of an ancient system of continuous reading.4 The latter persevered to a remarkable extent into the Middle Ages, as is shown by the Wiirzburg Comes, which provides, in addition to the Epistle for Sundays, Saints' Days, etc., forty-two readings for unspecified liturgical occasions, starting with Rom. 5.6-11 and continuing in the order of the accepted canon down to Heb. 13.17-21.

(iii) A Lectionary Hypothesis The weak point in the above account is at paragraph (4), where the authorities divide. Goodspeed's theory looks very implausible. Old files and church chests sound rather anachronistic in a community that was expecting the imminent end of the world: and when we do hear of a church chest (capsa), in the account of the Scillitan Martyrs, it contained, ironically enough, 'libri et epistulae Pauli viri iusti' 1 2 3

4

Baumstark, op. cit., pp. 17 ff., 173 ff. ibid., pp. 20 ff., 24 ff. There is a table of the earliest Byzantine use, drawn from four MSS of about 900, in F. H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, pp. 80 ff. J. A. Jungmann, The Mass of the Roman Rite (E.T., New York 1959), pp. 263 f.

used for liturgical reading I1 Polycarp collected the letters of Ignatius on the heels of the martyr's departure;2 and we should certainly have expected something similar for the far greater letters of his far greater predecessor. There is very little about Ephesians to commend the suggestion that it was a covering letter for a collection. Why should 'with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours', at 1 Cor. 1.2b, not be integral to 1 Cor., and so provide evidence of a general circulation of Pauline letters intended by the Apostle from the beginning? The position of Zahn and Harnack is really undermined by the strength of Harnack's points summarized in (3). If such strong forces made the collection inevitable, it would seem that they would act at once; and this makes us ask what it is which, in the opinion of so many, postpones the collection to the year 90. Goodspeed's answer is: 'the united testimony of Matthew, Mark and Luke'; 3 but what is the testimony of Matthew, Mark, and Luke? I have already indicated that there are considerable links between Luke and 1 Corinthians;4 is it not well known that there are similar links between Matthew and several letters? C. H. Dodd discusses some thirty passages in common in his essay, 'Matthew and Paul', 5 and I have extended the discussion in Chapter 8 of my earlier book. 6 It is true that it has been normal to explain these links as evidence that both writers independently adapted traditions of Jesus' sayings known to them; but the links are equally explicable by the view that Matthew knew the Pauline letters, and included parts of the Apostle's teaching in his Gospel. Whether such a possibility is allowed or not, the late date for the collection falls to the ground. If the links between Paul and Matthew are due to Matthew's knowledge of Paul, then Matthew already knew some form of Pauline collection by 80. If it is excluded on a priori grounds that Matthew could have so incorporated Pauline material, then the possibility of knowing whether Matthew knew Paul is being excluded by definition. The theory of an independent adaptation can certainly not be proved; in fact, in many instances the evidence is in favour of the view that Matthew was developing Pauline material.7 1

Passio Scil. 12. Polycarp 13. 3 See above, p. 220. 4 cf. p. 219, n. 3, above. 5 New Testament Studies (Manchester 1953), pp. 53 ff. 6 MLM, chapter 8. 1 This is because the Matthaean versions of the Matthaeo-Pauline logia are so often in characteristically Matthaean phraseology. The cases are argued seriatim in MLM, Part II. 2

The fact is that Goodspeed's assertion that Matthew did not know the Pauline letters is not supported by an examination of the evidence, and rests on a number of assumptions which were widespread forty years ago. Paul and Matthew then seemed to be at opposite ends of the Christian spectrum; the one the Church's great liberal, the other its principal conservative; that Matthew might have been in any sense influenced by Pauline Christianity seemed absurd. Floating traditions were then very much in vogue, as Form-criticism drew attention away from literary sources to oral traditions, which seemed likely to turn up in different churches in slightly different forms. The Church of the 65-90 period was envisaged as a scatter of individual churches between which a great gulf was fixed, in which major Christian communities had no idea what was happening in other parts of Christendom: Matthew's gospel was almost universally taken to be unknown to Luke, and John was often thought to have been ignorant of all three Synoptics. None of these notions has quite such impregnability of assumption today. It is evident, for example, that Matthew is by no means such a conservative as he was once painted. Dodd's conclusion is that 'Matthew represents a first approach from the Jewish-Christian side to the Catholicism which was to provide the Hegelian synthesis',1 and a recent commentator like H. B. Green includes a section in his Introduction on Matthew's similarities and differences with Paul.2 The very fact that Matthew chose to write an amplified second edition of Mark shows that he is not all that far from Mark's semi-Pauline theology. Further, the last generation has seen the establishment of Redaction criticism, and this has brought the recognition that many passages which hitherto seemed independent forms of floating tradition are in fact the same, with the redactoral hand of one evangelist or another making the difference. A corollary of this has been the willingness of more scholars to think that there was a traffic between the churches. So the suggestion that Matthew knew the Pauline epistles seems less improbable, and is certainly not to be dismissed a priori. We have to look at the common material, and ask whether there are signs that the Matthaean version is sometimes a secondary version of the Pauline. The first part of my earlier book is an attempt to work out criteria for distinguishing Matthew's own characteristic writing from material he received from tradition; and in the chapter 'Matthew and Paul' I applied these criteria to the common matter, concluding in many cases that the Matthaean versions are typical of the evangelist's writing, and so secondary. I shall not repeat this argument here, 1 2

'Matthew and Paul', in New Testament Studies, p. 53. The Gospel according to Matthew (Oxford 1975), pp. 34-7.

but rather ask in what way, if it is true, Matthew and his congregation are likely to have become familiar with the Paulines. The natural answer, especially in view of points (1), (2), and (6) above, is that they were read out in the course of the liturgy; and the serial use of O.T. books which I have argued for above, coupled with the later widespread cyclical reading of Paul shown in (8), would suggest a cyclical liturgical use from the beginning. So we have a hypothesis, and one more plausible on general grounds than either Harnack's or Goodspeed's: during the generation after Paul's martyrdom, his principal letters were collected in some churches, including Matthew's but not at first Luke's,1 and were used to edify the congregation in serial liturgical reading like other Scriptures. Such a hypothesis would account not only for the seemingly wide knowledge of the Paulines in the second century and the other factors mentioned, but also for the order of the letters. Romans contained matter on Christ's passion and resurrection, on Christian baptism and the Spirit, and was therefore well suited to be read from Easter on. It was the epistle written to the church in the imperial capital, and takes its place naturally at the head of the list; and there are treatments of the faith of Abraham, and of the predestining of Jacob and Esau which would fit with the Genesis sidrdt after Easter. Next should come Corinthians by virtue of its preponderant volume: the two Epistles were counted together in later lists as a unit.2 Again, there is a fair amount of Exodus background material which would follow on from Genesis/Romans—Christ our Passover, the baptism of the fathers in the cloud and the sea, the people sitting down to eat and drink and rising up to play; and in the second letter the glory of Moses' face on the mount, the tabernacle from heaven, and Paul's freewill offering. Then the shorter epistles in rough order of their length; but ending with Thessalonians, because therein is the material on the Parousia which belongs before Passover. Christ's return was especially awaited at Passover, and the Pauline material would go well with Mark 13 and Matt. 24—25. In such a way might be formed 1

2

The unitary fallacy—that what is true for one church must be true of the rest —underlies the view, common to Zahn and Harnack as well as Goodspeed and Mitton, that the first Pauline collection was made after 90. It is in fact obvious that the collection must have been made in one church first, and it is only too likely that a Syrian seaboard church such as is usually posited for Matthew would soon receive a copy. If, as the anti-Marcionite Prologue says, Luke lived in Boeotia, he would have been off the main trade-routes; how natural that he should know 1 Corinthians from Corinth near by! The Corinthian church might not have been so enthusiastic to disseminate 2 Corinthians. See p. 222, n. 3, above.

the order in which the Epistles were ultimately accepted into our Bibles, and which is already testified (with the addition of Hebrews) in p46. It is the same order as in the Muratorian Canon and Tertullian, but with the cycle beginning after Easter instead of before: for the position of Romans at the end of the list does not affect its place if the list represents a cycle of liturgical reading. No doubt other orders were tried in different churches, and Marcion's order, with Galatians first, could be due to an independent attempt to fit Paul's teaching on Abraham and Hagar in with the Genesis sidrdt at the beginning of the year; or perhaps it was just that the Pontic church from which Marcion came was evangelized from Galatia. Such an hypothesis of the origin of the Epistle seems to be required by a marked feature in Matthew: the material common to the Gospel and Paul falls in blocks following the biblical order of the epistles. The only explanation for this phenomenon would appear to be that Matthew already, in the early 80s, used the epistles in a cycle of lections in the way I have suggested.

(iv) Pauline Logia in Matthaean Discourses The matter in common between Matthew and Paul is naturally restricted to the teaching sections of the Gospel for the most part, and that means that, on a lectionary interpretation of Matthew, they fall at the festivals. The first teaching block is the Sermon on the Mount, set for Pentecost, and I set out what I take to be the most obvious Pauline links with the Sermon: 5.11 'Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you . . . Rejoice and be glad'.

Rom. 5.3 'More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings'. Rom. 12.12 'Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation'. Rom. 13.8 ff. 'He who loves his 5.17-48 'Think not that I have neighbour has fulfilled the law. come to abolish the law and The commandments, "You the prophets; I have come not shall not commit adultery, You to abolish them but to fulfil shall not kill, You shall not steal, them . . . You have heard that You shall not covet", and any it was said to the men of old, other commandment, are "You shall not k i l l . . . You summed up in this sentence, shall not commit adultery . . . "You shall love your neighbour Whoever divorces his wife . . . as yourself." Love does no You shall not swear falsely . . . wrong to a neighbour; thereAn eye for an eye . . . You shall fore love is the fulfilling of the love your neighbour and hate your enemy." But I say to you .. .'. law'. 7.12 'This is the law and the prophets'.

228 5.29 'If your right eye causes you to sin (oKavSaMCei)... If your right hand causes you to sin (oKotvSaMCei)'.

5.31 f. Divorce and remarriage. 5.37 'Let what you say be simply "Yes" or "No" . . . ' . 5.39 'Do not resist one who is evil'. 5.40 'If any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well'. 5.44 'Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you'.

6.12 'Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors'. 6.31-33 "Therefore do not be anxious, saying, "What shall we eat?" or "What shall we drink?" . . . But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness'. 7.1 f. 'Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgement you pronounce you will be judged . . . ' .

Rom. 14.13-23 'Rather decide never to put a stumbling block (oncdvSo&ov) or hindrance in the way of a brother . . . ' . 1 Cor. 7 Divorce and remarriage. 2 Cor. 1.17 ff. 'Do I make my plans like a worldly man, ready to say Yes and No . . . ' . Rom. 12.17 'Repay no one evil for evil...'. Rom. 12.19 'Beloved, never avenge yourselves'. 1 Cor. 6.7 'To have lawsuits at all with one another is defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong?'. Rom. 12.14 'Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them'. Rom. 12.20 f. 'If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink . . . Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good'. Col. 3.13 'If one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive'. Rom. 14.17 'For the kingdom of God is not food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit'. Rom. 2.1 ff. 'Therefore you have no excuse, O man, whoever you are, when you judge another; for in passing judgement upon him you condemn yourself...'. Rom. 14.4,10,13 'Who are you to pass judgement on the servant of another? . . . Why do you pass judgement on your brother?... Then let us no more pass judgement on one another'.

The more Pauline parallels one adds to the list (and clearly many more remote ones could be added), the plainer do two things become: (i) all the closest parallels are with Romans, and (ii) the preponderance of these, easily, occurs in Rom. 12—14. For example, although 1 Cor. 7 and Matt. 5.31 f. are both about divorce and remarriage, the distinctive things about the Matthaean ruling precisely do not occur in 1 Cor.: Paul has no reference to 'except on the ground of unchastity', and he allows initiative by the woman as well as the man, as in Mark 10 and not in Matthew. The Yes, Yes, No, No correspondence is in rather different meanings in the two passages, and looks merely verbal. Per contra, the lawsuits passages have the same teaching, but Kpivonai is the only word in common; and there are different words for 'forgive' in the Lord's Prayer and Col. 3. By contrast, there are three different topics in common between the Sermon and Rom. 12: rejoicing in tribulation, caring for your enemies and blessing/praying for those who persecute you, not repaying evil. In Rom. 13 there is an extended parallel in that both Matthew and Paul (i) see love as the fulfilling of the Law, (ii) equate the Law for this purpose with the Ten Commandments, (iii) cite a series of these Commandments beginning with the forbidding of murder and adultery (Matthew), adultery and murder (Paul), (iv) end the series with 'You shall love your neighbour', whether as a summary (Paul) or a version of'You shall not covet your neighbour's . . . ' (Matthew). The first theme of Rom. 14 is the warning against judging, the second against causing your brother to stumble, and these occupy the whole chapter. Both judging and scandalizing are topics of the Sermon, though the first more strongly; Matt. 5.29 ff. is concerned with causes of stumbling to yourself. But this is succeeded by a striking correspondence: Paul says that the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking but righteousness; Matthew that Christians are not to be anxious about what they should eat and drink but to seek God's kingdom and his righteousness. The parallels between Rom. 12—14 and the Sermon are so frequent as to invite the hypothesis that the one has had a direct effect upon the other; and since Matthew constructed the Sermon thirty years after Paul wrote Romans, we may have our suspicions which way the dependence would be. Perhaps the more ethical part of the Epistle appealed to Matthew more, for his Sermon on the Christian Way; but it is noticeable that the chapters also fall rather a convenient distance into the Epistle for lectionary use in the way that I have suggested. The opening chapters could be used as Paul's statement of the gospel of the cross and resurrection at Passovertide; Rom. 4 expounds the faith of Abraham, the theme of sidrdt 3, 4, and 5; Rom. 9 touches on

the predestination of Jacob and Esau, who meet in sidrd 8; and R o m . 12—14 could then be taken as the Pauline exposition of the fulfilling of the law in love, at Pentecost, the feast of the giving of the Law. 1 The second block of teaching material in Matthew is that for New Year, M a t t . 10—11. Again I set out the best Pauline parallels with these chapters:

9.36—10.10 'He had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, "The harvest is plentiful, but the labourers are few; pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out labourers into his harvest... Go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel... The labourer deserves his food."' 10.16 'So be prudent (AT) as serpents and innocent as doves'. 10.40 'He who receives you receives me'. 11.25-27 'I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for so it was wellpleasing before thee (AT). All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him'.

1

See Table VIII.

1 Cor. 9.7-14 'Who tends a flock without getting some of the milk? . . . The ploughman should plough in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of a share in the crop. If we have sown spiritual good among you, is it too much if we reap your material benefits? . . . In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel'. Rom. 16.19 'I would have you wise as to what is good and innocent (AT) as to what is evil'. Gal. 4.14 '(You) received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus'. 1 Cor. 1.19—2.10 'For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the understanding of the understanding (AT) I will thwart... It pleased God through the foUy of what we preach to save those who believe . . . What no eye has seen () God has revealed to us through the Spirit'. 1 Cor. 14.20 'Be babes in evil, but in thinking be mature' (cf. 1 Cor. 3.1). 1 Cor. 15.27 f. 'For God has put all things in subjection under his f e e t . . . When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected . . . ' .

The correspondences are not so numerous as between the (much longer) Sermon and Romans, but the first and last are extended correspondences, and in both cases with passages in 1 Corinthians. In 1 Cor. 9 Paul mentions that Jesus authorized his apostles to receive their livelihood from their converts, and the passages in which he does this in the Gospels are Mark 6.7-13 and its parallels. Matthew rewrites Mark here; and I have argued that he uses images like sheep and the harvest which are especially common in his Gospel,1 sentence-forms which are peculiar to his Gospel ('Worthy the labourer of the food of him', cf. 'Sufficient to the day the evil of it', 'Enemies of a man the householders of him', etc., the arcetic rhythm),2 and vocabulary which is characteristic of him, such as 'plentiful/few', 'the lord of', 'labourers', 'worthy', and 'food'. 3 But it is remarkable that in the very same context Paul uses the same images of the shepherd tending the flock and the ploughman and thresher labouring for the harvest. The images are Paul's, but the words are Matthew's characteristic words and phrasing; a dependence on 1 Cor. seems the easiest explanation. In the case of Matt. 11.25 ff. the same conclusion is even more likely. Paul cites a version of Isa. 29.14, substituting 'thwart' for 'hide': Matthew has 'the wise and understanding' from the same text, and 'hide' also. Paul says that the wise on earth and the rulers above could not take in the cross, but that God was pleased (S686KTIO6V) to reveal it to the low and despised: Matthew has Jesus thank his Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for hiding the mystery of his Sonship from the wise and revealing it, in his pleasure (e&Soictat), to babes. Babes are well thought of by Matthew: to Paul they have a good side and a bad one. The delivering/subjecting of all things to Jesus is common to Matt. 11.27 and 1 Cor. 15.27; and so is the expression 'the Son', absolutely, to the following phrases in both. The last is so rare in both Matthew and Paul as to make the agreement striking. Since almost all the words in the Matthaean passage, apart from those he shares with Paul, are characteristic of the evangelist, Matthaean dependence seems probable.4 Matthew's New Year Discourse is for other reasons5 the Missionary Charge, and the presence of parallels with 1 Cor. 9, on which it may depend, must be an accident. The same is not so evident for Matt. 11.25 ff. The theme of the chapter, the failure of the Jews to repent 1 2 3 4 5

MLM, pp. 100 ff. ibid., p. 79. ibid., pp. 345 f„ 477 ff. See MLM, pp. 360 ff. MLM, pp. 338 ff

at the preaching of either John or Jesus, is the New Year repentance theme, but the conclusion, and especially v. 27, 'All things have been delivered . . d o e s not grow very easily out of the context. The unrepentant cities were not said to be wise or understanding; there is no antecedent to the disciples being thought of as children; and, more particularly, there is no call for Jesus to proclaim his universal lordship at this point. But a context in worship where 1 Cor. 15 had just been read would well account for the delivering of all things to the Son; the babes come in 1 Cor. 14; and in 1 Cor. 13 Paul looks forward to his knowing God, using the same verb (feniyivdxricG)) as Matt. 11.27. The vfimoi would recall the passage on revelation to the simple and the thwarting of the wise in the early chapters of the epistle, which otherwise makes a somewhat remote contact with the topic of Matt. 11. We should need just about the interval between Rom. 14 and 1 Cor. 15 to cover the distance from Pentecost to New Year. There are 71 chapters in the Pauline Epistles (excluding 2 Thess. and the Pastorals) to cover 69 units of Matthew, or about one a week; there are seventeen chapters of Paul from Rom. 15 to 1 Cor. 15 inclusive, and sixteen weeks (112 days). Matthew's Harvest Parables (13) for Tabernacles provide less scope. There is a passage in 2 Cor. 9.6-10, 'He who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully . . . ' ; and there is the fruit of the Spirit in Gal. 5, and 'Whatever a man sows, that he will also reap' in Gal. 6. But the citing of such texts is bootless: Matthew put the harvest parables there to celebrate Ingathering. With two services at Atonement and eight days of Tabernacles and the Saturdays, Matthew would just about read 2 Corinthians through in Tishri, and he would not reach Galatians till the next month. Dedication begins with Matt. 17, but there is teaching on the Church in the previous pericope; so I begin the Pauline parallels with Matt. 16.13 ff., the Petrine Confession: 16.18 'And I tell you, you are Eph. 2.20 f. 'Built upon the Peter, and on this rock I will foundation of the apostles and build my church'. prophets, Christ Jesus himself

16.17 'For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father'.

being the cornerstone, in whom the whole building (AT) () grows into a holy temple in the Lord'. Eph. 3.4 f. "The mystery of Christ, which was not made known to () other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets'.

17.2 'His face shone like the sun'. 17.24—18.10 Not to scandalize. 17.25 Paying toll and tribute. 17.20 'If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, "Move from here. . . " ' . 18.12-20 The Apostles' duty to be pastors of the Church, seeking the lost sheep, restoring the sinners, excommunicating.

18.15 Gaining your brother. 18.16 'Take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two witnesses or three (AT)'. 18.17, 20 Excommunication. 'For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them'.

18.21 ff. Forgiving my brother. Unmerciful servant. 'So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart'. 19.1-9 Permanence of marriage. 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'.

2 Cor. 3.7 "The Israelites could not look at Moses' face because of its brightness'. Rom. 14,1 Cor. 8 Not to scandalize. Rom. 13.7 Tribute to whom tribute is due. 1 Cor. 13.2 'If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains'. Eph. 4.1-16 'With all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit... And his gifts were that some should be apostles, ( ) some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry . . . ' . 1 Cor. 9.19 ff. Gaining Jew and Gentile. 2 Cor. 13.1 'Every word shall be confirmed by the evidence of two witnesses and three' (AT). 1 Cor. 5.3 f. 'I have already pronounced judgement on the man who has done such a thing in the name of the Lord Jesus. When you are gathered, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus . . . ' (AT). Eph. 4.32 'Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you'. Eph. 5.22 ff. Relations in Marriage. 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.'

There is much to be said about the Corinthian parallels, but clearly for our purposes it is the Ephesians ones which are of interest: first, because there are four or five of them; and second, because the interval between Tabernacles and Dedication is nine weeks (62 days), which would allow space for the finishing of 2 Corinthians and the reading of Galatians. So, at the rate of a Pauline chapter a week, which we have been allowing, we should just about have reached Ephesians in time for Dedication: that is, if Ephesians was in existence, and if it was accepted as Pauline, and if it held its traditional place after Galatians—rather a lot of hypotheses. I do not see how these questions can be reckoned apart from the Matthaean evidence itself. It seems plain that Ephesians was not written by Paul, 1 but that it is written in the style of Colossians and other Pauline letters; so it was not in existence before Paul's death in 64. It is referred to or quoted by Ignatius and Polycarp,2 and (according to R. H. Charles3) was known to the author of the Revelation; so it was probably an authorized text in the churches of the twelfth decade. Marcion included it in the Pauline corpus before Colossians and Philippians, and the Muratorian Canon before Philippians and Colossians. Since there is thus no sign of difficulty in its acceptance as Pauline in the second century, it might seem easier to place it fairly soon after Paul's death. It has a number of doctrinal differences from Paul, but nothing that requires a later date than, say, 70-75. There is thus no reason to rule out the possibility that Matthew used it in the years when his Gospel was in process of formation, in about 75-80. As for its place in the Pauline order, I am following the hypothesis that the traditional, biblical order is the oldest, with some show of logic behind it, Romans coming first and the rest in order of length. There is one exception to this (standard) view, for Galatians in fact occupies half a page less of Greek text than Ephesians. But it is at this point precisely that the lectionary theory helps. Dedication is the festival of the Tabernacle and Temple; of the offering of the people's gifts for use in them; and of God's hallowing them by his indwelling. Ephesians is the epistle in which the Church is the point of exposition; and the central 1 2

C. L. Mitton, The Epistle to the Ephesians (Oxford 1951), seems to me to have demonstrated this, against my earlier opinion, MLM, p. 156n. Ign., Eph. 12.2, 'Paul . . . who makes mention of you in every epistle in Christ Jesus', Polycarp 1.3, 'By grace are you saved, not by works'= Eph. 2.8 f.; 12.1, 'Be angry and sin not, (and) let not the sun go down upon your wrath'= Eph. 4.26. The opening of Ignatius' Ephesians seems to be formed on the pattern of 'Paul"s Eph. 1.1-4; 3.3-5; cf. Zahn, op. cit., p. 818 f. 3 Revelation I, lxxxiii ff.

image under which it is expounded in the first part of the letter is that of the Temple. The dividing wall between Jew and Gentile is broken down: the Christians are built on the foundation of Christ and his apostles and prophets, the whole structure being joined together and growing into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom they also are built into it for a dwelling-place of God in the Spirit. It might seem natural to set Ephesians as the Dedication Epistle, and let Galatians precede it. The thing that turns this suggestion from a hunch into a probability is the way in which Matthew has altered Mark. Mark has no commendation of Peter at Caesarea Philippi; Matthew not merely introduces a commendation, 'Blessed are y o u . . . ' , but a commission to be the Church's rock and authority. This proves to be the first of a series of commissions to the apostles on the ruling of the Church, which becomes the topic of the Dedication teaching; and the surprising interpretation of Peter's name as the foundation-rock of the Church, instead of his Lord, who holds this position elsewhere,1 is common ground with Eph. 2.20 f. There the Church is being built into a temple, and it is the apostles and prophets who are its foundation, with Christ as the cornerstone: a position they hold elsewhere only in Rev. 21. Here Peter's naming as Rock is interpreted as foundation-rock also, and the Church appears for the first time in the Gospel-tradition as a universal entity, and under the image of a building.2 Matthew also adds to Mark that the confessing of Jesus as Christ by Peter was no human insight but a revelation from God: the very doctrine of the revelation of the mystery of Christ by God to his holy apostles and prophets which is found a few verses further on in Eph. 3.4 ff. Nowhere else in the Pauline corpus are the apostles given privileged status as those given to understand the divine mystery. Following Peter's Confession, Mark describes the Transfiguration and the healing of the possessed boy; and there are then three paragraphs of teaching—who is greatest, the strange exorcist, and scandals. In the first is taught the need of humility, in the second the acceptability of even remote adherence to the Gospel, in the third the concern for beginners in the faith lest they stumble through the disciples' fault. Matthew follows Mark in the Transfiguration and Possessed Boy, but he considerably adapts the teaching paragraphs 1

Jesus is the foundation of the Church in 1 Cor. 3; its cornerstone in 1 Pet. 2.6 and Eph. 2.20; the head of the corner in Mark 12.10 and parallels, Acts 4.11, 1 Pet. 2.7. 2 For Matthew's creativity in the Petrine logion, under the influence of Eph. 2.20 ff., see MLM, pp. 386-93.

which ensue, turning them into a discourse to the Twelve on discipline in the Church. The point about scandalizing is elaborated over the payment of Temple Tax (17.24 ff.), a topic well suited to the feast of the Dedication of Temple offerings. Then the who-isgreatest paragraph is expanded in its lesson of humility by the introduction of 'Unless you turn and become like children . . . ' (18.3 f.). Following this, the Strange Exorcist is suppressed, a very rare event in Matthew's handling of Mark. But the teaching on scandals is much clarified and amplified (18.6-20): the Twelve are to be pastors of Christ's flock, seeking out the lost sheep; or, in other words, they are to seek out the sinners in the church and restore them, if it be possible, to the Church's fellowship. The theme of the Discourse then veers from the Apostles' discipline of the Church to their own need to forgive, as God has forgiven them (18.21-35, On Forgiveness, and the Unmerciful Servant). This may owe something to the end of Mark 9, 'Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another'; but the development is marked. Now, all these themes are present, and expounded at length, in Eph. 4. There it is first taught that God gave the Church officers, of whom the first were the Apostles, to equip the saints for the work of ministry; by the time of Ephesians there are further officers called pastors; the need for all lowliness, meekness and forbearance is stressed, with the aim of maintaining a profound unity within the Church; and finally it is said, 'Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.' In fact, as is often noted, Matthew's Unmerciful Servant does not quite illustrate the preceding conversation: Peter was told to forgive seventy times seven offences, and the parable speaks only of the forgiving of the single debt of a hundred pence. Perhaps Matthew's mind was distracted by the plain forgive-as-you-have-been-forgiven teaching of Eph. 4.32. It is an accident that teaching on marriage follows in Eph. 5, the next ensuing chapter; and Matt. 19.1-9, On Remarriage, follows the order in Mark. What is not an accident is that Matthew has altered the citation of Gen. 2.24 from Mark's form to that in Eph. 5.31. Mark follows the LXX wording, except that he leaves out the clause 'and shall cleave to his wife', and the 'his' after 'mother'. Matthew inserts the omitted clause, and drops the 'his' after 'father' as well; in which matters his text agrees with Ephesians against Mark, and in the latter point against the LXX also.1 So there would seem to be considerable evidence for thinking that Matthew has amended Mark against a background of readings from 1

1 am following the Nestle text: there are variant readings in all four passages.

Ephesians over the Dedication period; more especially as the references from the Epistle follow the Gospel in order. Matthew's final teaching block is a double Discourse: the antiPharisee Polemic in Matt. 23, and the Eschatological material in 24—25.1 have suggested1 that these chapters were read in Matthew's church in the first two weeks of Nisan, before Passover; on the hypothesis that we are now examining, these weeks would be the occasion of reading 1 Thessalonians, at the end of the cycle. The following are the most obvious links between Paul and Matthew in ch. 23: 23.3 'So practise and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practise'. 23.16 'Woe to you, blind guides . . . ' . 23.31-36 'Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers . . . Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will () persecute from town to town, that upon you may come all the righteous blood . . . Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation'.

Rom. 2.13 'It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers'. Rom. 2.19 'If you are sure that you are a guide to the blind'. 1 Thess. 2.14 ff. ' . . . the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and persecuted us out (AT), and displease God and oppose all men by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved—so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last!'

The verses in 1 Thess. 2 make five points, each of which is present in Matt. 23, and four of them in the peroration of the Discourse. First, there is the killing of Christ and the prophets: the Jews' killing of the prophets is mentioned only here in Paul, and only twice in Matthew. Second, there is the persecution of the Christians, a more widespread theme. Third, there is the prevention of the preaching of the gospel to all men/the Gentiles: a point made in Matt. 23.13, 'You shut the kingdom of heaven against men'. Fourth, there is the notion of the filling up of the measure of Jewish sins, which occurs only in these two passages in the N.T. Finally, there is the coming of God's wrath on the Jews, seen by Paul as already evinced in their hardening, by Matthew as in the future, in A.D. 70. In this case a dependency relationship seems unavoidable. Matthew's 1 MLM, pp. 419 ff.

language is his own, but the thoughts, and their sequence in his peroration, are f r o m 1 Thess. 2. There is a similarly close relationship between Matt. 24—25 and the description of Christ's coming in 1 Thess. 4—5. 24.30 f. 'They will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.'

24.42 f. 'Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the householder had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have watched and would not have let his house be broken into'. 24.48 ff. 'But if that wicked servant says to himself, "My master is delayed", and begins to beat his feliow servants, and eats and drinks with the drunken, the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him'. 25.1-13 The sleeping bridesmaids.

1 Thess. 4.16 f. 'For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air . . . ' . 1 Thess. 5.1 ff 'But as to the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need to have anything written to you. For you yourselves know well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the n i g h t . . . But you are not in darkness, brethren, for that day to surprise you like a thief'. 1 Thess. 5.5 ff. 'For you are all sons of light and sons of the day; we are not of the night or of darkness. So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober. For those who sleep sleep at night, and those who get drunk are drunk at night. But, since we belong to the day, let us be sober'.

It is not only that so much matter is in common; that alone is striking, for there is very little in c o m m o n between other eschatological passages such as Luke 17 and 1 Cor, 15. It is that so many of the features are new in Matthew, non-Marcan features; and also that they follow each other in the 1 Thessalonians order. The trumpet call is a Matthaean addition to M a r k ; and so is the thief in the night; and so is the drunken servant; and so are the sleeping bridesmaids. The thief in the night follows the description of the gathering of the saints in 1 Thess. as in Matthew, and is succeeded

by the sleeping and drunkenness themes together, where they follow separately in Matthew. Matter in common which is also shared by Mark comprises: the Lord's coming, the clouds, the (arch)angels, the gathering, the unknown times and seasons/day and hour, keeping awake. The parallels between 1 Thess. and Matt. 23 and 24—25 are sufficiently numerous to make an impressive climax to the evidence that Matthew was expounding the Pauline Epistles round the year. The intervals of time, and of Pauline matter, between Dedication/ Ephesians and Passover/Thessalonians are very close to what the theory would require. There are normally twelve Saturdays (86 days) between the end of Dedication and the end of Adar. To cover these we should have four chapters of Philippians, four of Colossians, one of Philemon, and 1 Thess. 1: ten chapters. 1 Thess. 2 would be read the first Saturday in Nisan, with Matt. 23, and the remaining chapters would be split between the second Saturday and the weekdays following up to Passover, however many they might be, with the Apocalypse and parables of Matt. 24—25.1 The evidence for the use of the Epistles in the Matthaean church in this way is not unsatisfactory. There are clusters of passages in Matthew which have Pauline parallels, corresponding largely with the Discourses, other than the Parables in Matt. 13. The Pauline parallels show a marked tendency similarly to fall in clusters: Rom. 12—14 with the Sermon on the Mount at Pentecost; 1 Cor. with the New Year material in Matt. 10—11; Ephesians with Matthew's Dedication matter in 16—19; 1 Thess. 2 with Matt. 23, 1 Thess. 4—5 with Matt. 24—25 in time for Passover. The intervals between these Matthaean discourses, measured in Saturdays round the Jewish-Christian Year, in every case correspond plausibly with the volume of interposed material in the letters. So the reason requiring Goodspeed's church chest theory—the Synoptics' apparent ignorance of Paul—disappears. The more appealing alternative is confirmed. The web of Christian travel ensured that the letters which had first been read in one or a few churches were soon available to be read in all. Such spiritual wealth was not hidden away in a napkin, but put out to profit in reading and exposition. The order into which the letters fell was the most logical one available, that which has persevered into our Bible. And traces of some of the first preaching based on them is at our disposal in the Discourses of Matthew. The Epistles material is satisfactory in another way. Lectionary theories run the risk of explaining everything. I have argued that the prophetic books are in some way parallel with the Torah, and the 1 cf. MLM, pp. 432 ff.

Chronicler's work, and many of the books in the Writings, and St Luke's Gospel and St Matthew's. To offer so many explanations in terms of lectionaries must cast doubt upon the sanity of the theorist: perhaps he thinks Bauer's Lexikon was written as a lectionary. But here we may apply a test-case with the Epistles. With Adam and Abraham and Jacob and Esau in Romans, and Christ our Passover and our fathers in the desert in 1 Corinthians, and Moses' face transfigured and our earthly and heavenly tabernacle and the freewill offering in 2 Corinthians—perhaps, says a siren voice, Paul's letters were written as a lectionary also. But it does not work: the intervals are wrong, the parallels are missing for most of the units, Abraham and Hagar in Galatians should be Korah and Balaam. All is well: we belong to the day, and are sober.

MARK AND HIS SUCCESSORS 'An unhappy alternative is before you, Elizabeth', says Jane Austen's Mr Bennet. 'Your mother will never see you again if you do not marry Mr Collins, and I will never see you again if you do'. I perceive that my predicament is not dissimilar, and that I am about to estrange a large part of my readers: for many of them will reject my thesis as preposterous if I conclude that Mark was written as a lectionary book, and many others will reject it if I do not. On the one side, have not the Form-critics shown that the pericopae in Mark are pearls on a thread, and that, moreover, a theological thread in the mind of the evangelist? Is it not agreed that collections of pericopae were to Mark's hand, already formed in the pre-Marcan Church, such as the series of controversy stories in Mark 2—3.6? Has it not been established that Mark (or his predecessors) grouped sayings together on a simple mnemonic basis—'in the name' sayings, 'scandalize' sayings, fire-and-salt sayings? Where, then, could there be room for a liturgical structure, such as I have posited for Matthew and Luke? But, above all, is not Mark the deposit of the primitive Church that had cut its links with Judaism? How should we think that a church that set aside the laws of sabbath and divorce and the oral Torah, that expected the end imminently and was resolved upon martyrdom, should at the same time meekly continue the Jewish customs of weekly lection from the outmoded Law? What has an eschatological community to do with traditional synagogue worship? Of course Mark is not a lectionary book. But, on the other side, it may be asked, what kind of a theory is it which tells us that 'gospel' means lectionary book in the case of Matthew and Luke, but something different in the case of Mark? Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. All the ingenuity spent in aligning the first and third Gospels with the liturgical cycle will be fruitless if it cannot be convincingly shown that Mark is constructed in the same way—and such a construction will not be easily made, seeing that Mark is but 60 per cent of the others in length, and of quite a different balance. But if Mark is not a lectionary book, the whole theory loses plausibility. Elizabeth declined Mr Collins's proposal by applying rational considerations and ignoring a priori ones, and my hope must he in the same policy. It is by no means clear that all Gospels must have 241

the same basis of origin, any more than all epics—the Odyssey and Iliad differ from the Aeneid and Paradise Lost, and very likely from each other, in their setting in life. Theological, and topical, and mnemonic groupings of pericopae in Mark are but received explanations for parts of the Marcan order: they may or may not be correct, and if they are, they may be compatible with, and subservient to, liturgical ordering.1 Nor does the expectation of an imminent end in any way exclude a traditional pattern of worship. It is quite normal for seceding churches to be radical in changing their doctrines and conservative in retaining their liturgies, as may be seen in many instances in sixteenth-century Christendom. Mark was familiar with Jewish customs,2 and it cannot be shown a priori that his church worshipped in a different way from that which I have argued to be likely for Luke's. It is best, surely, to banish all preconceptions from our minds, and look at the evidence. The question is, Does Mark display traces of a series of parallels with the readings of the Jewish liturgical year, either the Festal Year as with Matthew, or the sabbath cycle as with Luke? If it does, then we may find some way of reconciling Form-critical conclusions with a liturgical origin for the Gospel; if it does not, we may find an explanation for the different setting in life of its successors. As with Luke, 3 there are two preliminary matters to be settled before coming to grips with the text: first, whether we have any external check on how the Gospel should be divided; and second, where in the liturgical cycle, if at all, we should take the Gospel to begin. For the first, it seems we should follow the lead we have found helpful before.4 Codex Alexandrinus and its (many) allies provided 69 units for Matthew which corresponded with the presumed 69 liturgical occasions of a Jewish-Christian liturgical year. The same MSS provided 84 sections of Luke, and although it appeared that these were untrustworthy in detail, in that they differed both from the divisions in p75 and from those indicated by the 'rubrics' in the Lucan text, nevertheless it seemed that 84 sections would be just about what the presumed Lucan year would require, and what the 'rubrics' would indicate. We should, then, look to Alexandrinus once more to provide us with the number of sections; but we should look 1

cf. the passage from D. E. Nineham, The Gospel of Saint Mark, quoted in my Preface, above, p. viii. It did not occur to Nineham that the needs of the preacher's audience might have arisen from the Church's Year, but in other ways our accounts of Gospel origins are identical. 2 7.3 f.; 15.42. 3 cf. pp. 73 ff., above. 4 See MLM, pp. 180 ff.

rather to internal criteria for where to make the divisions. For Mark, perhaps even more than Luke, would soon be read in non-JewishChristian communities, which would abbreviate, adapt, and omit the O.T. lessons on which its liturgical structure (if any) was based; the points of division would then easily be changed, while the total remained the same. This brings us to our first difficulty: Alexandrinus divides Mark into a Proem and 48 Ke<|>oiXotta—and it will not be easy to make 49 readings go round a complete liturgical year, with fifty Saturdays, and at least some additional festal occasions.1 For the point of inception, there would seem to be three possibilities, as there were with Luke: the first Saturday in Nisan, as the beginning of the cycle of O.T. lections; the fifth Saturday in the series, allowing the Resurrection story to be read on Easter Day and its octave, the third and fourth Saturday nights in the year, and starting thereafter; or New Year, at the beginning of Tishri. The first is plainly impracticable, for one cannot have a liturgical cycle of Gospels starting on the first Saturday in Nisan and ending on the third. The second seemed attractive as a basis for both Matthew and Luke, but this does not foreclose the issue for Mark. For, first, to one starting with carte blanche, the logical place at which to begin a liturgical cycle might seem to be New Year, rather than the second Saturday after Easter. New Year in Tishri and the first sabbath in Nisan (following Exod. 12.1) are the two places provided in the Bible for a liturgical series to begin, and it is to them that a Christian evangelist brought up in Jewish ways might expect to look first; and if not Nisan I, then New Year. This, secondly, will resolve the puzzle of the 49 units in A. 69 units sufficed to provide for the complete Matthaean year, from the fifth Saturday in the Jewish cycle round to Easter: fifty Saturdays, and nineteen additional readings for the extra holy days in Dedication, the watches of Passover night, etc. Of these liturgical occasions, twenty-one are Saturdays between Easter and New Year; 48 units of Matthew suffice for the remaining period, from New Year to Easter. We should thus have almost exactly the same number of units given in A for Mark as proved sufficient to cover the period from New Year to Easter in Matthew. 1

P. Carrington, in The Primitive Christian Calendar, argued on the basis of the Alexandrinus divisions that Mark was a book of lections for twelve months of four sabbaths apiece. He (like me) took the Marcan cycle to begin at New Year. But then, an annual cycle beginning at New Year should end with the Resurrection in September; Carrington's scheme ignores almost all the landmarks of the Jewish Year; and he swings between reliance on the B (Vaticanus) and 'non-B' divisions without justification. The book is unpersuasive, but its instinct was profoundly right.

There are two further features which make the suggestion of a New Year beginning for Mark attractive. The first of these is the balance of the Gospel vis-a-vis Matthew. A glance at a Synopsis shows that Matthew is an expanded form of Mark, and that the expansion consists in Matthew having a new first half. Matt. 12— Corn on the Sabbath, the Withered Hand, the Healing of the Crowds, the Beelzebul Controversy, Christ's Real Brethren—begins a series of stories which follows the Marcan order through from Mark 2.23 to the end of the Gospel. A number of incidents have been transferred into Matt. 3—4, and 8—9, but the regular parallels begin from Matt. 12/Mark 2. This is exactly what we should expect if Mark began at New Year, for New Year is where Matthew has reached in ch. 12. The Harvest Parables for Tabernacles, then, which follow in Matt. 13, find their opposite numbers in Mark 4; the Matthaean Dedication material in Matt. 17—19 is paralleled in Mark 9—10; and Matthew's Passover Discourses in Matt. 23—25 are expansions of Mark 12.38—13. The balance of Mark would then correspond with the liturgical structure from New Year to Easter: we should have material for New Year and Atonement in Mark 1—2, for Tabernacles in (3—)4, for the Saturdays through to Dedication in 5 ff., for Dedication in (7—)9, for the Saturdays through to Adar in 10—12, and the end of the Gospel (13—16) for Nisan I, Passover and Easter. Matthew's Pentecostal Sermon (5—7) will be missing because Mark has no Pentecost. Finally, a New Year beginning for Mark explains in a convincing way the growth of the Gospel as a genre. By common consent the oldest part of the Gospels is the Passion complex; and it is easy to understand that from the year following the crucifixion the Church would wish to remember the Passion of Jesus at Passovertide. All our accounts are marked by a division into three-hourly units, and it is likely that from very early the twenty-four hours from sundown on 14th/15th were observed as a Christian fast, with the Passion stories told at the watches, just as they were when the curtain rises on Christian lections with the visit of Egeria to Jerusalem.1 Then, in so far as Christ's return was expected at Passover,2 there would tend to be fixed on Nisan I/II the recital of his prophecies of Return— elaborated with other prophetic and homiletic matter, no doubt, as the years went by. For the rest of the year, whatever material seemed suited to the theme of feast or ferial reading would be used, and would differ from church to church. But with time came the practice 1 2

J. Wilkinson, ET, chs. 35-37. See below, pp. 293 f.

of receiving converts in baptism at Eastertide, and the practice therefore of preparing them with a course of instruction from around Dedication;1 and so would grow the regular use, in this period, of material on the Christian Way, told in the context of Jesus' journey up to Jerusalem to his Passion. The Gospels grew backwards from Passovertide, backwards from the Passion. Inevitably, with time, the urge was felt to make something of a continuous story of Jesus' ministry, extending back from the last journey to its opening with John Baptist. The step was taken by Mark in Rome, in virtue of his familiarity with the Petrine traditions. He began at New Year, and it is for this reason that his Gospel looks like a Passion story with an extended introduction. But once this move was made, its essential unsatisfactoriness became obvious; for there is no sale for six-and-ahalf-month lectionaries. Churches wanted a cycle that ran round the whole year, and this is exactly what Matthew and Luke were designed to supply. Both of them, in their different ways, supplied readings for the whole year, from Easter II round to Easter: Matthew for a more conservative, Jewish-Christian, church with the accent on the festivals; Luke for a more Pauline, Gentile, church with the accent on the Saturday O.T. lessons. Mark is thus the middle term in a development of fifty years, from a set Paschal recitation and a free use for the rest of the year in the 30s, to two alternative complete cycles in the 80s. A Marcan beginning at New Year would not only be natural; it would explain a lot.

NEW YEAR

Mark 1.1-20 (Matt. 11/Luke 7.18-35) John Baptist, Jesus' Baptism, Call of Four New Year is the Jewish equivalent of the Christian Advent:2 it combines joy at the thought of the ultimate coming of God's reign with penitence at the thought of the judgement which that reign will bring. It is marked by the blowing of the Shofar (Lev. 23.24), to proclaim the day (Kripu^ate, Joel 2.15); and by three proper benedictions, the Malkuyot, the Zikronot and the Shofarot. Each of these comprises ten verses from scripture: the first on the kingship of God, looking forward to his ultimate reign (e.g. Zech. 14.9); the second on God's remembering of men's deeds to judge or reward, 1 2

cf. above, pp. 91-5. cf. G. F. Moore, Judaism, ii, 65. Moore correctly stresses the independence of Advent from New Year in historical development; but in fact the Advent message is rooted in the Marcan celebration of New Year.

and his remembering of his covenant; the third on the blowing of the Shofar, from Sinai to the last trumpet which shall gather the Dispersion to Jerusalem. We could hardly find a more appropriate occasion for Mark 1.1-20: 'John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming (AT) a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins' (.4), 'Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee proclaiming (AT) the gospel of God, and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel"' (.14 f.). The cycle of Isaiah readings, as I have expounded it, 1 brings the two chapters, Isa. 34 and 35, to the sabbaths about New Year. Isa. 34 describes the Lord's day of vengeance, his year of recompense for the cause of Zion (.8), the judgement that will descend upon Edom, desolating the land and giving it over to hawks and porcupines, jackals and wild beasts, devils and satyrs (.14 LXX). Isa. 35 moves on to the wilderness of Jordan blooming, as God comes with vengeance, with the recompense of God; the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped, the lame man shall leap like a hart, and the tongue of the dumb (noyOdXtov) sing for joy; and a highway shall be there, called the Holy Way. It is with Isaiah that Mark begins (1.2). Isa. 35 bids, 'Say to those that are of a fearful heart, "Be strong, fear not!" . . . a highway shall be there () the redeemed shall walk there.' The theme is taken up in Isa. 40, the passage that originally followed on from Isa. 35:2 'A voice cries, "In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God" ' (40.3). There the comforting voice is called 'the bearer of the gospel' (6 e6arreA.iC6nevog, 40.9). Mark improves on the Isa. 35 words, partly by citing Isa. 40.3, partly with Exod. 23.20. He heads his book with Isaiah's word, 'The beginning of the gospel.. .', 3 and tells that Jesus came proclaiming God's gospel. The language of Isa. 35 is retained in 'the voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord . . . John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness ... they were baptized by him in the river Jordan' (Mark 1.3-5). It should not be thought that Isa. 40 is the text which matters, being cited, and that Isa. 35 is dispensable. Few texts are more formative for the synoptists' tale, nor perhaps for Jesus himself, 1

pp. 162-4, 181, above. The arguments for the original continuity for Isa. 35 and 40 are given above on p. 163 n. 3 Isaiah LXX uses only the verb, eiwryeMConai (four times), Mark only the noun, Eixxry^iov (seven times); but the ease with which the Church moved from one to the other may be seen from Rom. 10.15 f. 2

than Isa. 35.5-6. Mark tells of good news that took the form of healings from 1.21 till 10.52, including the paralysed and the MoyiXdXog, and culminating (twice over) in the deaf and the blind. Matthew opens his New Year sermon (Matt, l l . l ) 1 with Jesus' reply to John, 'The blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear . . . ' , and Luke follows him, on the Sunday after New Year,2 with the same passage, a little abbreviated (Luke 7.18-35). They are both well past John Baptist by this stage in their Gospels: both return to him by a kind of flashback, for Mark had made New Year the feast of the preaching of John. Both give Jesus as referring to John's mission to the crowds in the wilderness, not clothed in soft raiment but—the very text from Exodus/Malachi which they have both omitted from their respective accounts of his ministry—'Behold, I send my messenger . . . ' The remainder of their discourses follow Mark in the New Year topic of repentance: this generation has been like children in the market, repenting at the preaching of neither John nor Jesus; woe to the cities where Jesus' miracles were done, because they did not repent; Tyre, Sidon and Sodom would have repented in dust and ashes; salvation has been hidden from the wise, and given to the babes. The sidra for the same sabbath was Lev. 9—11, 'On the eighth Day'; 3 perhaps Mark noted in it Lev. 11.22, 'Of (winged insects) you may eat: the locust according to its kind . . . ' , and so imagined what John would eat. After Jesus' baptism, 'The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered to him' (Mark 1.12 f.). The presence of Isa. 34 f. among the readings of the season shows us the sense of this somewhat obscure passage. New Year is the season in which God comes through the desert to inaugurate his kingdom. The desert is the abode of all manner of unclean animals (whose consumption is forbidden in Lev. 11); verging, in the Hebrew, into the satyr or he-goat, a Pan-like figure to whom sacrifice was forbidden in Lev. 17.7, and the night-hag (34.14); and in the Greek to 8ain6via. Soon, under the old Dispensation, on the Day of Atonement, a kid was to be dispatched into the desert for Azazel, for all the uncleannesses of the people of Israel (Lev. 16.8, 10, 16). Jesus, as God's Son, goes out to do battle with Satan, the prince of the demons, in his waste kingdom, the haunt 1 2 3

MLM, pp. 353 ff. See above, p. 85. See Tables III and VIII.

of his bestial and demonic minions; the result of his test-battle is victory, with the aid of ministering angels, who enable him to tread down his foes (Ps. 91.11 ff.). He returns to the world of men, and the unclean spirits at once know him, and beg mercy of him (Mark 1.21 ff.).1 Mark does not say that Jesus fasted, or that the angels fed him; the angels' service is in preserving him from stones and lions and dragons, as in Ps. 91, and the passage is actually quoted in the Temptations by both Matthew and Luke. Both these background readings, Lev. 9—11 and Isa. 34—35, are part of the cyclical series, and fall on the sabbath at New Year's tide. Whether there were special readings for New Year's Day itself at this time is not clear. The Mishnah (Meg. 3.5) prescribes a passage beginning at Lev. 23.23, probably only the three verses giving the New Year Law. The Talmud 2 prescribes Gen. 21, God's remembering of Sarah, for New Year's Day itself; and Gen. 22.1-19, the binding of Isaac, for the second day. It is worth speculating whether these readings could have been in force in the evangelists' time. If so, perhaps Gen. 21 contains a faint echo of Mark 1.1-8: it tells of the birth of Isaac, the 'seed' of Abraham, whose descendant was to be Christ the son of God (Gal. 3.16—4.7); and of Hagar's faring forth into the wilderness, where she is shown a spring of living water (Gen. 21.19). More impressively, Gen. 22 begins, 'After these things God tested (finelpaae) Abraham', as Jesus was tested (;cetpaC6nevo<;). God says to him, 'Take your son, your only son, whom you love (T6V ut6v ooo xdv dyonuTiTdv, 22.2), as God says to Jesus, 'You are my Son, my only Son' (Mark 1.11, AT, 6 old? noo 6 dyarnixd?). The Lord's angel calls Abraham from heaven (22.11), as the voice comes from heaven in Mark. If these correspondences appear strong enough to support the use of the Genesis readings in the first century, then Mark 1.1-8, John's Preaching, would be the Gospel for New Year's Day, and Mark 1.9-20 that for Tishri 2. Alexandrinus and its allies give Mark 1.1-22 as the Proem, but w. 21 ff. belong by sense with the Demoniac in the Synagogue. The inclusion of w. 16-20, the Call of the First Apostles, with the Baptism and Preaching of Jesus, seems logical. Verse 15 tells us that Jesus came preaching that men should repent and believe the gospel; w. 16-20 tell how the first four disciples did believe the gospel, and left their boats; God's reign is embodied not only in his Son, but in the eschatological community. 1 1

cf. E. Best, The Temptation and the Passion (Cambridge 1965). b Meg. 31a.

TISHRI

I 27. Lev. 12—13/3 Kms 1—2/Isa. 34 f./Joel 3 f.1

Mark 1.21-34 (Matt. 12.1-8, Luke 7.18-35)

Jesus' First Day at Capernaum

Leviticus has been so arranged that over the period of national repentance, between New Year and Atonement, the laws of the clean and unclean should be read. After the first sacrifice in Lev. 9, and the death of Nadab and Abihu, God teaches Aaron, 'You are to distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the clean and the unclean' (10.10); and there follow the laws of clean and unclean foods (11), women's uncleanness in conception (12), uncleanness through leprosy (13 f.), or through sexual discharges (15). Then, in 16.16, Aaron is to make atonement for the sanctuary because of the uncleannesses of the sons of Israel, and for the tabernacle of witness established in the midst of their uncleanness. Mark has just shown Jesus inaugurating God's reign by a test-battle with Satan, the prince of demons, in the desert; he now proceeds to display the fruits of this battle in the first day of Jesus' ministry, in Capernaum. Jesus is teaching in the synagogue with his newly-given authority, and immediately a man with an unclean spirit cries out in terror at his presence. Jesus silences him with a word, and at his command the unclean spirit comes out with shrieks and convulsions. He proceeds to Simon's house, where he finds the latter's mother-inlaw lying sick with a fever: while in Mark the fever leaves at Jesus' touch, in Luke he rebukes the fever (4.39), thus showing that another kind of spirit is thought to be at work. In the evening they brought to Jesus all who were possessed with demons; he cast out many demons, and would not permit the demons to speak, because they knew him. A new way of dealing with Satan and his unclean realm has been established. As Mark has plainly set out a single day's incidents, it seems arbitrary to subdivide it: A breaks the continuity at 1.29 (Simon's 1

The Old Testament readings are, except for the Histories whose divisions have been slightly amended, those which have been worked out in the previous chapters, and are put together here and in Table Vm at the end of the book. For the first Saturday night in Tishri, half-way through the year from 1st Nisan, the Marcan church would have reached sidra 27, Lev. 12—13, and the parallel readings (cf. p. 37, above). It should be remembered, (i) that there was no standard subdivision of the Prophets, so that a slightly different subdivision of the Histories to suit Mark rather than Luke may be equally valid; (ii) that less confidence can be placed in the Isaiah and Twelve readings than in the Histories, and less in the Prophets than in the Law; and (iii) that in any one year the Law and only one prophetic cycle would be taken.

wife's mother), against Mark's express 'immediately'; at 1.32, 'That evening, at sundown'; and at 1.40, the Leper. But when Mark is so sparing with expressions of time, it seems better to think that he gives them here with the intention of binding the story together, and that later tradition has subdivided the unit, assimilating to the general one-story-pericope-per-week pattern of the Gospel. Matthew and Luke have both used this material earlier in their Gospels, as belonging at the beginning of Jesus' ministry. Matthew continues from ch. 11 his theme of the unwillingness of 'this generation' to repent, with the Pharisees' criticisms of Jesus' disciples in the Cornfield, from Mark 2.23 ff.; but he amplifies the Marcan account from the background lections. Over the last weeks his church has heard read the sacrificial laws of Lev. 1—7, and the first sacrifice of Lev. 9, and there is more to come in Lev. 16 f.; currently it is hearing of King Solomon, and the Temple is at hand. Matthew draws out the reference to David's visit to the Temple at Nob with the priests' permitted profanation of the sabbath in the Temple. 'I tell you', he says, 'something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, "I desire mercy, and not sacrifice", you would not have condemned the guiltless.' The comment is very seasonal. I have argued1 that Luke is a Gospel written for Gentile Christians who had been taught to celebrate the Resurrection on the first day of each week, but who did not keep Jewish weekday festivals. So the first Saturday night in Tishri is New Year Sunday to Luke, and he gives his members a slightly altered form of Matthew's New Year sermon (Matt. 11) in 7.18-35. TISHRI II

2 8 . Lev. 1 4 — 1 5 / 3 Kms 3 ^ 1 / I s a . 36/Obadiah

Mark 1.35-45 (Matt. 12.9-21, Luke 7.36-50)

The Leper

Lev. 14 is the second half of the leprosy laws, which comprise the 13th chapter of the book as well. It opens, 'The Lord said to Moses, This shall be the law of the leper for the day of his cleansing . . . ' , and the whole sidrd is named after the key word of this sentence, 'The Leper'. Mark proceeds to tell the story of the leper who was healed by Jesus, and he makes specific reference to the Leviticus passage: 'Go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to the people.' Moses commanded the leper to show himself to the priest in Lev. 14.2, and the offerings for cleansing are specified in 14.4-32. The section Mark 1.35-45 coheres as a unity in two ways. In .35 1

p. 87, above.

Jesus goes out to a lonely place in quest of peace, and in .44 he charges the leper to see that he says nothing to anyone; in .38 he sets out for the next towns, and in .45 he could no longer openly enter a town—people come to him from every quarter, just as all men seek him in .37. Moreover, it is certain that the paragraph could not begin, 'And a leper came to him . . . ' All Mark's stories begin with a brief introductory setting: e.g. 1.21, 'And they went into Capernaum; and immediately on the sabbath . . . And immediately there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried o u t . . . ' , where there are two verses to set the scene before the story begins; or 7.24, 'And from there he arose and went away to the region of Tyre and Sidon. And he entered a house, and would not have any one know it; yet he could not be hid. But immediately . . . ' So here the Leper requires a setting, and this is provided by the Galilee preaching tour of 1.35-9. Matthew and Luke have both used the Leper at the beginning of Jesus' ministry, but both allude to it in their New Year material: .. lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear . . . ' (Matt. 11.5; Luke 7.22). There are no lepers in Isa. 35. Matthew continues to press his New Year topic of the Pharisaic failure to repent at Jesus' wonders, this time with the Man with the Withered Hand, the unit following the Cornfield in Mark. But as with the Cornfield, he adds his own touch at the end, in the form of a formula-citation. Mark had given as the divine revelation at New Year the words, 'Thou art my Son, my only Son; with thee I am well pleased'. The saying combines three O.T. texts: Ps. 2.7, 'My son art thou; I have today begotten thee'; Gen. 22.2, 'Take thy son, thy only son'; and Isa. 42.1, 'Jacob is my servant (child), I will help him; Israel is my chosen, my soul has accepted him' (LXX; 'in whom my soul delights', Heb.). There is not much of Ps. 2.7, and Matthew takes away what there is at 3.17, with 'This is my Son . . . ' But the Isaiah verse opens a passage pregnant with meaning, and is especially applicable to the Marcan statement of Jesus' withdrawal in the face of Pharisaic opposition (Mark 3.7-12), which Matthew has advanced to New Year's tide along with the Withered Hand. He therefore now cites it in full to prove Jesus as God's jtal?, his chosen, bearing God's spirit, not wrangling or crying till he brings the word of justice to the Gentiles (12.18-21; Isa. 42.1-4). The citation contains a number of small adjustments of the Greek of Isaiah,1 of which two are of particular interest to us: Matthew retains 6dyajtnT6g from Mark 1.11, against Isaiah's 'my chosen', thus confirming where he got the quotation from; and he writes fipfruaa, an uncommon word for 'I chose', against Isaiah's 1 See MLM, pp. 329 f.

'I will help him'. The word ottpexlCco is principally used in the LXX of God's choice of David and Solomon in 1 Chron. 28; and this suggests that Matthew's eye is again on the New Year passages in the Former Prophets, in which Solomon becomes king. There are only two Sundays in the first fourteen days of Tishri, and of these the first to Luke is New Year Sunday, and the second Atonement Sunday. I comment on the Lucan lesson, 7.36-50, the Sinner, in the next section. ATONEMENT

2 9 . (a.m.) Lev. 16 f./Isa. 37/Jonah 1 — 2

(p.m.) Lev. 18/Isa. 38/Jonah 3—4

(a.m.) Mark 2.1-12 (Matt. 12.22-37) The Paralytic (p.m.) Mark 2.13-22 (Matt. 12.38-45) Levi, Fasting To a Christian like Mark, Atonement was no more a matter of goats and the sprinkling of the sanctuary with blood; Jesus was God's vicegerent, and he had brought forgiveness to the Church. What story better epitomized this than that of the Paralysed Man to whom Christ had said, 'My son, your sins are forgiven'? The scribes sitting there had called it blasphemy, and had asked who could forgive sins but God alone; but Jesus had given the man strength to walk, and so proved that he, as Son of Man, had authority on earth to forgive sins. Here was the message for a Christian Atonement. And there was the faith of the bearers besides: forgiveness comes through faith. The story is excellent for the purpose. But what for the minhah, the afternoon service? There were many stories about Jesus' acceptance of sinners. But an especially good one would be the call of Levi, since he had been a notorious sinner, a tax-collector. He had given a famous party to welcome Jesus, and the room had been full of sinners. The Pharisaic scribes had asked, 'Why does he eat with tax-collectors and sinners?'; and had been put to flight with Jesus' epigram, 'Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.' The incident contains the further ironic point that the man was called Levi: the high priest of the line of Levi will perform the rites of the book of Leviticus no more, now Jerusalem is fallen.1 Mark adds still another point: Atonement was a fast day, the Black Fast, and this raises the question whether Christians should fast on it. People had come (whether at Levi's banquet or on another occasion) and asked why Jesus' disciples did not fast as those of John and the Pharisees did; Jesus had replied, 'Can the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them?' Joel's New Year 1

cf. A. M. Farrer, A Study in St Mark (London 1951), pp. 79 ff., 308 ff.

proclamation still echoes: 'Sanctify a fast . . . Let the bridegroom leave his room, and the bride her chamber' (2.15 f.). But Jesus had meant that the days would come when the bridegroom would be taken away from them, and then they would fast: and so must the Church now. But this does not mean that we can make common cause with the Jews: a patch of unshrunk cloth will tear an old garment, and new wine will burst old bottles. They carped at Jesus in his lifetime, and they have no part in the Church now. Matthew has used these two stories for weeks after Pentecost, the latter one for the fast of 9th Ab; but there is, only a little way further on in Mark, another story full of teaching about forgiveness, the Beelzebul controversy. The difference between the two evangelists hardly ever shines out more clearly. Forgiveness Day is to the Pauline Mark an occasion of rejoicing at divine mercy: to the more works-oriented Matthew it is an opportunity to warn against cheap grace. Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Whoever says a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. Jesus told the Pharisees that they must either make the tree good and its fruit good, or not; and the same goes for the Matthaean Christian. The Yom Kippur liturgy lays great emphasis on verbal sins as in need of repentance: 'especially numerous are the terms denoting sins committed with the tongue—falsehood, slander, frivolous and unclean speech'.1 Matthew brings Jesus' speech to a climax, 'I tell you, on the day of judgement men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned' (12.36 f.). For the evening Matthew renews the controversy, with the scribes' and Pharisees' demand for a sign. This enables him to expound the Atonement scriptures, for the second lesson from the Twelve Prophets was Jonah 3—4, and the Former Prophets lessons over the season are the stories of Solomon. 'No sign shall be given to it', says Jesus, 'except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will arise at the judgement with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. The queen of the South will arise at the judgement with this generation and condemn it; 1

J. H. Hertz, in a Foreword to the Soncino translation of The Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo'ed, I (London 1938), xix.

for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here.' Jonah's sojourn in the whale's belly was read on Atonement in the morning; the repentance of the Ninevites at his preaching, on Atonement in the evening. Solomon's wisdom, and the coming of men from all the kings of the earth to hear it, come in 3 Kms 3—4, which I have sited on the second Saturday in Tishri; the Queen of Sheba's visit would come two or three weeks later. Matthew ends with the Return of the Evil Spirit. Each year Israel had exorcized the nation's evil, transferring it to the scapegoat, which was to bear it away into the waterless places of the desert for Azazel; each year back it came, multiplied, to re-infest the cleansed house from which it had been driven. So shall it be, says the saddened evangelist, with this evil generation; such ceremonies are vain—atonement is through Christ alone. I have briefly expounded Luke's The Sinner earlier,1 as his ideal lesson for Atonement Sunday. The story is an interpretation of the Woman who anointed Jesus in Mark 14, and is transferred to this point because it is on Atonement Sunday that a Lucan Christian will wish to meditate on the heart-broken penitence that brings the Sinner to Christ's feet, where her tears become tears of gratitude at being forgiven. Luke has used the Paralytic earlier, in the Marcan sequence, but here a second time he grafts in the central teaching of the story: 'And he said to her, "Your sins are forgiven". Then those who were at table with him began to say among themselves, "Who is this, who even forgives sins?" ' So Mark's familiar Atonement lesson finds its place in Luke's Atonement lesson also. Nor has Luke forgotten Solomon's wisdom in knowing the truth in the matter of the harlots. 'If this man were a prophet', say Jesus' critics, 'he would have known who and what sort of woman this is who is touching him, for she is a sinner.' Atonement brings out all three evangelists as most fully themselves: forgiveness means a lot to each of them, but it means most of all to Luke. TISHRI I I (ALTERNATE)

30. Lev. 19 f./3 Kms 5 f./Isa. 39/Nahum 1

Mark 2.23—3.6 (Matt. 12.46-50) The Cornfield and the Withered Hand There can be only two Saturday nights in Tishri before Tabernacles begins on 15th: sometimes the second falls before Atonement on 10th, sometimes it coincides, sometimes it follows. The sidrdt cycle provides three short readings for the two sabbaths, Lev. 12 f., 14 f. and 19 f., of which the second and third can be combined with other 1 p. 86, above.

readings as may be required; andMark and Matthew similarly provide material to be used as the vagaries of the calendar may require. Luke does not observe Jewish weekday festivals and fasts, and he simply provides the John Baptist pericope, 7.18-35, and the Sinner pericope, 7.36-50, for the two Saturday nights. The sidra, Lev. 19—20, is called 'Holy', and opens, 'And the Lord said to Moses, Say to all the congregation of the people of Israel, You shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy. Every one of you shall revere his mother and his father, and you shall keep my sabbaths: I am the Lord your God.' Later it contains the classic text, 'You shall love your neighbour as yourself'. Now it was precisely upon the tension between these two principles, of sabbath holiness and love, that the issue had turned so often between Jesus and the Pharisees. There was, for example, the occasion when his disciples had been in need and hungry, and had plucked grain-heads on the sabbath, and the Pharisees had called them law-breakers. Jesus had cited the example of David to them over the shewbread— a seasonal illustration, too, for the law to set forth the shewbread every sabbath day comes in Lev. 24, in the following sidra—and had concluded that the sabbath was made for man and not vice versa. Or there was the healing Jesus did in the synagogue: Lev. 19.1 reads in the Greek, 'Say to the synagogue of the sons of Israel'. They had watched to see if he would heal on the sabbath, and afterwards had made plans to have him killed; but to Jesus the question was whether it was lawful to do good, and to save life, on the sabbath—love took precedence over sabbath law. It is to be noted that Mark tells the two stories as part of a single unit. There is no place in his Gospel where the opponents of Jesus are given in the indefinite form, 'they'. They are always named. Hence the 'they' in 3.2 must look back to 'the Pharisees' of 2.24. Nor does Mark tell us directly that the healing took place on a sabbath; we knew that from 2.23. So he gives us an ideal comment on the day's first lesson. We have in consequence a natural explanation for the cluster of 'controversy-stories' so often noted between Mark 2.1 and 3.6. Atonement calls forth stories of Jesus' gift of forgiveness, and his acceptance of sinners: Lev. 19 calls forth stories of Jesus' overriding of the sabbath. These were exactly the actions which had caused the greatest resentment among the conservatives, and so evoked the controversies. The collection is there for a reason, even if a somewhat contingent one: that Lev. 19 was read on the sabbath after Atonement, so that the Christian themes of Christ's authority to forgive, and to override the sabbath, come next to one another. Matthew has already told the two Marcan stories a week earlier

(see above, pp. 250 f.), and tells the next incident in Mark, Jesus' Mother and Brothers, on which I comment below; this enables him to give the whole of Tabernacles to Jesus' Parables of the Harvest. TABERNACLES

31. Lev. 21—24/3 Kms 7—8.53/Isa. 40/Nahum 2 15th Zech. 14

15th Mark 3.7-19a (Matt. 13.1-9) 16th Mark 3.19b-30 (Matt. 13.10-17) 17th Mark 3.31-5 (Matt. 13.18-23) 18th Mark 4.1-9 (Matt. 13.24-30) 19th Mark 4.10-20 (Matt. 13.31-5) 20th Mark 4.21-5 (Matt. 13.36-43) 21st Mark 4.26-9 (Matt. 13.44-52) 22nd Mark 4.30-4 (Matt. 13.53-8) Sunday Luke 8.1-21

Multitudes, Call of Twelve Beelzebul Mother and Brothers Sower Parables, Sower Interpreted Lamp, Measure Seed Growing Secretly Mustard Seed Women, Sower, etc., Mother

Tabernacles was an eight-day festival, for which the traditional sidra for the first two days is from Lev. 22—23, as we have seen, and the haphfarah for the second and eighth days from 1 Kings (3 Kms) 8, Solomon's dedication of the Temple. The coincidence of these readings with the cyclical units running round from Nisan has been part of the argument I have developed above1 for an original Nisan cycle, and the passages cited above for the 31st units of the Law and Prophets cycles may have been in use for the sabbath during the festival, or perhaps for the weekdays as well. The traditional haphfarah for the first day is Zech. 14; and we have Prov. 1—9 and Ecclesiastes as possible lections from the Writings also.2 Tabernacles was one of the three feasts when 'all Israel' was to appear before the Lord (Exod. 23.17; 34.23; Lev. 23.34 ff.). In Zech. 14 the vision is of the worshipping throng swollen with members of all nations: 'Then every one that survives of all the nations that have come against Jerusalem shall go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of booths' (.16). Such a scene seemed to Mark to be prefigured in the massive crowds that had followed Jesus in his ministry, and he gives such a picture as his setting for a Christian Tabernacles. Jesus withdraws from the plotting Pharisees, 'and a great multitude from Galilee followed; and also from Judea and Jerusalem and Idumea and from beyond the Jordan and from about Tyre and Sidon a great multitude, hearing all that he did, came unto him' (Mark 3.7 f.). Those who came to the Lord's teaching and healing were Israelites from Jerusalem, Judea, Galilee and Perea, and there were Edomites and 1 pp. 33-5, 130 above. 2 pp. 204 f., above.

Phoenicians besides. The situation in the Torah is closely mirrored in Mark's narrative. In Leviticus the people are understood to be encamped, as they have been since Exod. 19, at the foot of Sinai. Moses, however, goes up into the mountain to receive the Lord's statutes: 'The Lord said to Moses on Mount Sinai' (Lev. 25.1, the opening verse of sidra 32, called 'On the Mountain'). Shortly afterwards Moses is instructed by God to take twelve phylarchs for the tribes, who are named, each with his tribe (Num. 1); and it is said, "They shall be with you (UE6* &NFI>v Scrovxoa), each of the rulers according to his tribe' (.4). Later still Moses will send out (dTtfoteOs) twelve other named men, one from each tribe, to go into the Promised Land, one of whom is Ause the son of Nave; 'and Moses named (fe«av6naae) Ause the son of Nave Jesus' (Num. 13.17). The Marcan story follows this pattern. Jesus goes up on the mountain and calls to him those whom he desired; and he appointed twelve, to be with him (dxnv net' afrroo) and to be sent out (iva &jtocn:6M.ia) to preach, and to have authority to cast out demons: 'Simon whom he surnamed (&t£0riKsv fivona) Peter; James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James, whom he surnamed Boanerges', and nine others whose names he gives (Mark 3.13-19). The movement of the Gospel story causes the evangelist to draw in advance on the Torah events which are its prophecy. All Israel and beyond come to Jesus; and he teaches them, and casts out demons. But Jesus had appointed twelve apostles for the twelve tribes of Israel, to preach and to cast out demons, so their ordaining is described alongside the coming of the multitudes, with the mountain location and the innocent-looking phrase 'to be with him' drawn in from the Law. Once Mark is giving the names of the Twelve, the later, surnaming, text from Num. 13 occurs to him: if Moses had surnamed a man Jesus in the desert, surely this was a foreshadowing of the surnames which Jesus the son of God had bestowed on his Twelve. So we have a suitable Gospel story for the first day of the feast.1 The law of the feasts in Lev. 23 is succeeded by the law of shewbread in Lev. 24, and then by the law of blasphemy. An Israelite woman's son blasphemes the Name, and curses: he is stoned (Lev. 24.10-23). For the second day of the feast Mark tells a story which gives Jesus' teaching on the true blasphemy: it is not the speaking of God's name in anger, which can be forgiven, but rather the wilful refusal to acknowledge the action of the Holy Spirit in Jesus' healings, and the attributing of such miracles to unclean spirits. That is a blasphemy which never has forgiveness (Mark 3.28-30). The incident 1 1 owe much of the substance of this paragraph to an unpublished posthumous essay by Austin Farrer.

is placed second because it is an important part of the mystery with which Mark's Tabernacles teaching is shot through. All Israel was to come to the feast, and men came from all over Israel to hear Jesus; but not all Israel was to be saved. The crowd followed him home (3.19b—20); but Jesus' own relations tried to suppress his ministry, believing him to be mad. Then came scribes from Jerusalem, saying that Jesus was possessed by Beelzebul. Both groups prefigure the rejection of Christ and the Church by much of Israel in Mark's own time. The imagery in which Jesus replies to the scribes is perhaps taken from the 3 Kms story. Solomon was a strong king, and the lesson tells of the building of his house. But after his death the kingdom will be divided against itself, and will not stand; Jeroboam will rise up, and the united kingdom will be at an end. The other side of the coin is given in the story of Jesus' Mother and Brothers which follows as a lesson for the 17th. Jesus' family according to the flesh, his mother and brothers, stood outside the circle of the crowd who sat around him as his disciples, and tried to call him away from his vocation. But Jesus replied that his true family were his adherents in faith: 'Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother' (3.35). The true Church is not the visible Israel of whom Jesus was by natural descent, but the invisible Israel from all nations whose only mark is the wish to learn his teaching and to do God's will. Tabernacles is the later name for the feast of Ingathering (Exod. 23.16; 34.22), and retains its character still as the harvest thanksgiving for the ingathering from threshing-floor and winepress (Deut. 16.13; Lev. 23.39): an important part of the festival in the Mishnah is the looking forward to God's blessing on the following year's harvest in the coming of the rain. It must have seemed proper to the Church from early times, therefore, to include in the Tabernacles celebration those parts of its teaching which drew on the cycle of harvest to teach the lesson of God's kingdom, in sowing, growth, and reaping; indeed, it is likely that Jesus taught such themes himself, and that he did so at the harvest season. Such a practice would seem the more obviously appropriate in a cycle of worship in which the Solomon saga was a part of the background, both in the 3 Kms haphtardt, and in the additional 'Solomon' material, Ecclesiastes and Proverbs. For God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, so that his wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east; he also uttered three thousand proverbs (mashal, rtccpapoX&s), and spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of the wall—he spoke also of beasts and of birds and of reptiles and of fish. The work which we call Proverbs

is entitled in the Hebrew Mishlei, the Proverbs or Parables of Solomon (Prov. 1.1), and so is naturally thought of as an extension of the Former Prophets reading for the season. Mark has already introduced the idea of parables at the Feast of Booths at 3.23, 'And he called them to him, and said to them in parables, "How can Satan cast out Satan?" ' Now, on the 18th, he proceeds to a more topical use of the mode. The crowd of 3.32 has become 'a very large crowd gathered about him'; he teaches them from a boat as at 3.9; 'and he taught them many things in parables', beginning with the Sower. Christ sowed the word broadcast, and the birds (Solomon's birds) and the drought and the thorns took their toll; but his seed also fell on good ground, and brought a phenomenal harvest. Isaiah, in a passage falling soon after Tabernacles (Isa. 42.18), cries, 'Hear, you deaf; and look, you blind, that you may see! Who is blind but my servant . . . ? He sees many things, but does not observe them; his ears are open, but he does not hear.' Mark closes the pericope in similar vein, 'He who has ears to hear, let him hear.' Mark has his own theory of the reason for Jesus' use of parables, which he expounds on the 19th (4.10-20). The same division is made as in the Mother and Brothers passage, between 'those who were about him' (4.10; cf. 3.32, 'a crowd was sitting about him') and 'those outside' (4.11; cf. 3.31, 'his mother and his brothers came; and standing outside . . . ' ) ; the mysterious failure of the Jews to hear the word is attributed to their being predestined by God to blindness and deafness. The secret of the kingdom is given to the Church by grace, and though they do not at first understand the parables, causing Jesus to exclaim, 'Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables?', he does go on to interpret it to them. But to those outside all is in opaque sayings, parables, so that they may indeed see but not perceive, hear but not understand, lest they repent and be forgiven. Isa. 42 is expounded through the earlier oracle in Isa. 6.9 f. Tabernacles is the season of parables, and parables have a crucial function in the establishment of God's kingdom. There are further harvest parables for the three remaining days. The first is expressly spoken to the Church: 'And he said to them' (sc. those about him with the twelve) the parables of the Light and the Measure. The burning of lights was a major part of the celebration of Tabernacles,1 and the gathered grain was kept in 'bushels' and parcelled out by measure. The Church is to follow Jesus' way, to take heed to what it hears and set its light on a stand; to sow again in generous measure. The more a Christian does so, the more will 1 cf. Moore, Judaism, il, 46; and John 8.12.

he be rewarded. Light is struck in a corner and grain hidden in the earth, but only that the light may shine abroad and the seed-corn bring further harvest. Such is the message for 20th (4.21-5). Another aspect of the harvest is its God-given, natural growth; and in the case of the divine harvest, the God-given, angelic reaping. This forms the topic of another parable, the Seed Growing Secretly, for the 21st. All man does, all the Christian does, is sow the seed; the growth follows automatically while he sleeps and rises, and in due course God will initiate the gathering. The prophecy of Joel, read at New Year, still rings in the evangelist's ears, 'Put forth the sickles, for the vintage has come' (3.13 LXX): Mark ends the parable of the day, 'he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come' (4.29). For the last day of the festival he adds a final parable, the Mustard Seed. It was written in the Isaiah lesson, 'To what have you compared the Lord? And with what comparison have you compared him?' (Isa. 40.18); and Mark opens, echoing this, 'With what can we compare the kingdom of God, or what parable shall we use for it?' Solomon spoke of trees and birds; and his parable was taken up by Ezekiel and Daniel in the image of the great tree which filled the world, and the birds were the nations who nested in its branches (Ezek. 31; Dan. 4). So does Mark now in Jesus' name develop the image further. God's kingdom is the great tree that will fill the earth, and the nations are the birds of heaven that will nest in its shadow (4.32; Ezek. 17.23; 31.6; Dan. 4.12, 21). Now it is small as a mustard seed; yet how great is its future! Mark sums up his Tabernacles message in a brief recapitulation of the function of parables: 'With many such parables he spoke the word to them, as they were able to hear it; he did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything.' Mark's series of Tabernacles lessons has an artistry of its own. It gives for the first time—and for the last time for four chapters— a solid block of teaching. It opens with the gathering of great crowds from all Israel and beyond, and describes the twin process of the Lord's rejection by the scribes and his acceptance by his new family, the Church; and then it gives, under the topical mode of harvest parables, both the teaching of the word's acceptance and rejection, and the way in which teaching by parables attains this result. Matthew improves the artistry, by taking the narrative elements ahead, and giving the Tabernacles week to Harvest parable teaching only. He begins with three days on the Sower, following Mark: (1) the parable itself, (2) the reason for parables, now elaborated with a full formulacitation of Isa. 6.9 f., and other matter, (3) the interpretation of the Sower. He then repeats this scheme with (4) a second parable, an

improved Matthaeanized version of the Seed Growing Secretly, the Tares, (5) Mark's Mustard Seed, and a pair, the Leaven, with a second statement of parable-policy, with a formula-citation of Ps. 78.2, (6) the interpretation of the Tares. He adds (7) three new short parables, the Treasure, the Pearl and the Dragnet, with its interpretation; and closes the week with (8) the rejection of Jesus' teaching, from Mark 6.1-6.1 have expounded Matthew's method elsewhere,1 and limit myself here to two brief comments. Sometimes we have found Matthew's formula-citations in the lesson for the day (e.g. Hos. 11.1; Judg. 13.5), sometimes in associated passages (e.g. Rachel in Jer. 31.15), sometimes in the Marcan parallel (e.g. Isa. 40.3 in Matt. 3.3/Mark 1.2). Of the two formulacitations in this chapter by which Matthew justifies Jesus' parableteaching, one is of a passage referred to in Mark. Mark says that everything is in parables 'so that they may indeed see but not perceive . . . ' (4.12), an open reference to Isa. 6.9 f.; Matthew cites the LXX form in extenso (13.14 f.). The other seems to be arrived at in a similar way. Matthew, balancing (5) with (2), is in need of a second biblical justification for parable-teaching, and all Mark says in the parallel verse is, 'he did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything' (.34). Earlier, Mark has spoken of the gospel as the mystery of the kingdom (.11), something hidden and secret (.22). So Matthew produces an amended text of Ps. 78.2. 'I will open my mouth in parables' is the LXX verbatim: fev jiapaPokocl? is in Mark 4.2, cf. 33. 'I will utter dark sayings from the beginning' is entirely changed to 'I will declare things hidden from the foundation (of the world)': KpCntxra is in Mark 4.22; the declaring, i.e. explaining, is in Mark 4.34; the foundation is a Matthaean (25.34) clarification of the Marcan eternal secret (4.11). So neither of the formula-citations in Matt. 13 is due to the O.T. lections; both are drawn out of the Marcan Vorlage. The second point is Matthew's apparent dependence upon the opening chapters of Proverbs, which I have proposed as a Tabernacles lection. Prov. 1.6 reads, '(The man of understanding) will understand parable and dark saying, speeches of the wise also and riddles', which would be agreeable to his general theme. 'If you will seek (wisdom) as silver, and search diligently for it as for treasures . . . ' (Prov. 2.4) is probably taken up in the parable of the hidden treasure. 'It is better to trade (fenjiopEueaOai) for (wisdom) than for treasures of gold and silver . . . ' (Prov. 3.14) is probably taken up in the parable of the trader (ejwtopo?) in pearls. Prov. 3 mentions precious stones as well as metals; the similar passage in Job 27 gives 1 MLM, pp. 364-76 on ch. 13, and ch. 3 on parables in general.

pearls besides. As so often, Matthew develops Mark by carrying further what is already implicit in the latter. Mark writes in full awareness of the seasonal theme of Solomon and his parables. Matthew teaches that a greater than Solomon is here, but this generation will not have his wisdom (12.42); he ends his Harvest Discourse with the rejection at Nazareth, amending Mark to, 'Where did this man get this wisdomT (13.54). Luke does not have the responsibility of a full Tabernacles teaching week, but only a Harvest Festival Sunday. He reduces the Marcan discourse to its core elements, the Sower and its interpretation, with a few additional sayings (8.9 f., 16-18); prefixing a linking account of Jesus' mission-tour, and moving the Mother and Brothers unit to the end (.19-21). In years when 1st Tishri was a Sunday, 22nd would be also, and Luke's church would need the Mother and Brothers as an independent lesson; for most years the Lucan conclusion ('My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it'), assimilated to the parable ('they are those who, hearing the word, . . . bring forth fruit', .15), rounds the unit off conveniently. The Mustard Seed, with Matthew's Leaven, Luke postpones, to be taken with other Matthaean matter in the Journey (Luke 13.18-21); the rest of the Marcan discourse he omits. TISHRI

IV 32. Lev. 25—26.2/3 Kms 8.54—9/Isa. 41/Nahum 3 33. Lev. 26.3—27.34/3 Kms 10—11/Isa. 42/Hab. 1

Mark 4.35-41 (Matt. 14.1-12) =Luke 8.22-5 The Storm on the Lake There are 54 sidrdt to cover a year of either 50 or 51 sabbaths and the Day of Atonement; so that there are always two, and sometimes three, spare sidrdt, which can be used to suit the vagaries of the calendar. The presence of two short sidrdt at the end of Leviticus is an indication that an adjustment was customarily made here: it would be a convenient aide-memoire to finish Leviticus on the last sabbath in Tishri, using 32, 'On the Mountain', as an independent unit if there were five sabbaths in the month, combining it with 33, 'The Statute', more normally. The association of God's victory over the waters with the end of the Autumn Festival has a long history, probably extending back to pre-Israelite times. Many commentators on the Psalms note the presence of the theme in psalms claimed on other grounds to have their origins in a New Year Festival.1 It is noticeable, moreover, that the theme of God's judgement of the gods/triumph over the 1

Notably S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien (Kristiania 1921-4); and more recently, J. H. Eaton, Psalms (London 1967).

chaotic water-powers often occurs at the end of psalm-collections. The Asaph psalms (73—83) end with the expectation that God will now judge the gods above (82) and their subjects below (83). Book III (73—89)/the Korah psalms ( 4 2 - 4 9 , 84 f., 87 f.) end with the triumph of 89—'Thou dost rule the raging of the sea; when its waves rise, thou stillest them. Thou didst crush Rahab like a carcass, thou didst scatter thy enemies with thy mighty arm' (.9 f.). Book IV ends with two historical psalms (105 f.) preceded by 104: 'Thou didst set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be shaken. Thou didst cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At thy rebuke they fled; at the sound of thy thunder they took to flight...' (.5 ff.). It would seem as if Yahweh's triumph over the waters was originally the climax of the autumn festival, looking forward to the November thunderstorms when he would take up his reign. I have suggested above, 1 that in N.T. times the psalms were used in a cycle like the other Scriptures; and elsewhere that Book IV was used at Tabernacles. 2 If this was so, Ps. 104 would be fresh in Mark's mind; and 107 would be the psalm for Tishri IV. Ps. 107.23 ff. LXX runs: 'Some went down to the sea in ships, doing business on the great waters; they saw the deeds of the Lord, his wondrous works in the deep. He spoke and the stormy wind arose, and its waves were lifted up. They mount up to the heavens and descend to the depths; their soul melted in their evil plight, they were troubled, they staggered like the drunkard, and all their wisdom was swallowed up. Then they cried unto the Lord in their affliction, and he brought them out of their distresses. And he commanded the storm, and it stood still into a gentle breeze, and its waves were silent. And they were glad because they were quiet, and he guided them to their desired haven.' It is evident that this passage has been influential in the Marcan storm-stilling story. 'The Lord' is now Jesus, who is taken to be divine. The word 'he rebuked' (the wind) is the same used of God's rebuke of the waters at Ps. 104.7: the word 'Be still!' (ra<|>ina)ao) implies that the sea fell silent as in Ps. 107.29. The outline of the story is identical. Further elements are in common with Jonah 1, read a fortnight earlier: Jonah was asleep, and is awakened; the sailors cry to the Lord, 'Let us not perish'; and the account ends, 'And the men feared the Lord with a great fear' (.16; cf. Mark 4.41, 'And they feared a great fear'). There may even be a hint of Lev. 1 3

p. 183, n. 4, above. See my 'The Fourth Book of the Psalter', JTS 26.2 (1975), 269-89.

26.6, 'You shall sleep, and none shall make you afraid' in Jesus' trusting sleep.1 Matthew has used the Marcan stories from 4.35—6.13 already, and is content to be out of phase for a few weeks. Luke rejoined the Marcan sequence with the Sower at Tabernacles, and he also tells the Storm this week. He assimilates even closer to Jonah with iKivSuveuov and K>.u8a>v=a storm (8.23 f., Jonah 1.4). CHESHVAN

I 34. Num. 1—4.20/3 Kms 12—13/Isa. 43/Hab. 2

Mark 5.1-20 (Matt. 14.13-21) =Luke 8.26-39 Gerasene Demoniac As the Torah moves from Leviticus to Numbers, the tempo of the story changes. The long Law-giving on Sinai is over, and Israel prepares to march through the desert to the covenanted land. The thousands of her tribes are numbered for the coming war (Num. 1—2) with their standards round the tent; first the secular tribes (Num. 1—2), and then the three clans of Levi, Gershon, Kohath and Merari (3 f.). The two numberings, at the beginning and end of the desert march (Num. 1 ff. and 26), supply the Greek name of Numbers to the book; the Hebrew tradition knows the whole book and its opening sidra alike by the initial phrase, B'midhbar, In the Wilderness. Mark, and Luke after him, follow the lead. Jesus' long (for them) teaching of the crowds by the mountain (Mark 3.7—4.34; Luke 8.1-18) is over. The Storm-Stilling is made the means of taking him over into the desert country east of the Lake. Jesus has no armies to take with him, but he comes with his Twelve, the phylarchs of his new Israel (3.13-19; Num. 1.4-16). The desert is to Mark, however, the abode of demons and wild and unclean animals (Mark 1.12 f.); and in the weeks after Tabernacles Isaiah constantly prophesied of the coming healing and liberation God would accomplish in the desert—'I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand () to open the eyes of the blind, to bring the bound and them that sit in darkness out of bonds and the prison-house.... Rejoice, thou wilderness, and the villages thereof ( ); they shall give glory to God' (Isa. 42.6 f., 11 f.); 'Behold, I do new things, which shall presently spring forth, and you shall know them: I will make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the dry land. The beasts of the field shall bless me . . . ' (43.19 f.). The false gods, Isaiah says, will be confounded; my people will be released, and will come through the desert. Christian tradition provided a number of stories, no doubt, of Jesus' exorcizing demons; but none more suitable than the 1

Cited by Nineham, op. cit., p. 146.

terrifying man who met him in the hill-country (Mark 5.5, the desert Luke 8.29), bound with chains and fetters and living among the tombs. Not only had Jesus driven the demons from him, but he had spoken of himself as held by a regiment of them, 'My name is Legion; for we are many', thus making plain the nature of the spiritual war. The completeness and permanence of Jesus' victory was proven by the flight of the massed spirits into two thousand unclean swine, and thence to their destruction. No more convincing incident could be thought of as an evidence of God's advance through the desert to the defeat of all his enemies; and, for what it was worth, it had taken place in the country of the Gerasenes, drawing their name from Gershon, perhaps, in the sidra. Matthew, still some pericopae ahead of Mark, has reached the Feeding of the Five Thousand: a not unsatisfactory landfall. As Moses of old drew up his thousands in the wilderness, whom God fed with the manna, so now does Jesus withdraw into a desert place, followed by a great crowd of five thousand men, besides women and children (cf. Exod. 12.37), whom he feeds with miraculously multiplied bread. CHESHVAN

Mark

II

5.21-34

35.

Num.

(Matt.

4.21—7/3

Kms 14—15/Isa. 44/Hab.

14.22-36) =Luke

8.40-8

3

The Woman with Flux

The sidra completes the priestly specifications at the end of Num. 4, and proceeds to some assorted laws. The first of these (Num. 5.1—3) begins, 'And the Lord spoke to Moses saying, Charge the children of Israel, and let them send forth out of the camp every leper, and everyone who has a sexual flux (yovo^ufi) and everyone who is unclean from a dead body. Whether male or female, send them forth out of the camp . . . ' What better occasion could there be than this on which to tell the famous double miracle that Jesus had wrought, first on the woman who had a flux of blood (ftxru; aluato?) twelve years, and then on the dead daughter of Jairus the synagogueruler? Well, perhaps one should limit oneself to a single healing story each Saturday, but the father's intercession for his dead daughter, whether by tradition or by Marcan artifice,1 precedes the woman's touching Jesus in the throng. Few passages could so well demonstrate the contrast between the Old and the New 1

Mark's fondness for sandwich structures does not justify the confident statements of commentators that the division of the Jairus story is his creation. He could have made sandwich-stories of Simon's wife's mother (with the demoniac) and the possessed boy (with the Transfiguration), and does not; the story as it stands has quite a convincing verisimilitude which may well be due to an oral tradition of unity.

Dispensations. Under Moses, to touch a corpse made one unclean: indeed, not only in Num. 5.2, but again in the Nazirite law it is stressed, 'All the days that he separates himself, he shall not go near a dead body'—even for his nearest of kin. If there is a sudden death beside him, he defiles his consecrated head (Num. 6.6-12). But with the coming of God's Son, a man can say, 'Come and lay your hands on her': Jesus is not defiled, but the girl is raised to life. Perhaps the Histories lesson has also not been without influence. There (at least in the Hebrew, and in some Greek MSS) Abijah the son of Jeroboam falls sick, and the queen comes in disguise to inquire of the prophet Ahijah of the fate of her son. God had refused her prayer for her child then, for the wickedness of his father; but now God grants the intercession of father for daughter. As the queen crossed the threshold into her palace, the boy died: Jesus and his party go into Jairus' home, and the girl is raised to life. CHESHVAN

III

36.

Num.

8—12/3

Kms 1 6 — 1 7 / I s a . 45/Zeph.

Mark 5.35^3 (Matt. 15.1-21) =Luke 8.49-56

1—2

Jairus' Daughter

The pollution that comes from touching a dead body is a constant theme of the present section of Numbers. It recurs in the 36th sidra: when the keeping of Passover was commanded, 'there were certain men who were unclean through touching the dead body of a man', who said to Moses, 'We are unclean through touching the dead body of a man' (Num. 9.6 ff.). 'The Lord said to Moses, " ( ) If any man of you ( ) is unclean through touching a dead body, he shall still keep the Passover" ', but in the second month (.9 ff.). Here then is a text from which to expound what had been begun last week, Jesus' taking of the dead girl's hand, and raising her to life. There is, however, a far more obvious and fundamental text to hand in the Histories, for the sequence which we are following is from 3 Kms, and has brought us as far as the raising of the dead boy to life by Elijah in the seventeenth chapter. There the boy's mother interceded with the man of God, and he laid the body on his bed; at his prayer in word and action God brought the lad's soul back, and he restored him to his mother. Here it is the girl's father who asks Jesus to bring her back to life, and the Lord takes her by the hand from where she has been lying; she rises, to her parents' amazement. There are few liturgical parallels which could confirm more strikingly the hypothesis we are considering. Jairus' daughter is the only raising of a dead child to life in Mark; there are only two similar stories in the Old Testament, the raising of the dead boy by Elijah here, and the same by Elisha in 4 Kms 4. The occurrence of Elijah's

miracle within a few weeks of the Tabernacles lection in 3 Kms 8, and of the Jairus story within a similar distance from the Marcan Tabernacles material in Mark 3.7—4.34, is just what we should expect if the theory is true: the absence of such a correspondence would have been a striking disconfirmation. CHESHVAN IV

37. Num. 13—15/3 Kms 18/Isa. 46 f./Zeph. 3

Mark 6.1-6a (Matt. 15.22-8, Luke 9.1-9)

Rejection at Nazareth

The apostasies of Israel in the desert began with discontent with the manna in Num. 11, and Aaron and Miriam's jealousy in Num. 12; but the most serious and disastrous of Israel's rebellions was their refusal to accept the good news of the land God had promised, brought to them by Jesus son of Nave and by Caleb. Jesus and Caleb rent their garments, and spoke to all the synagogue of the sons of Israel, 'Do not be apostates from the Lord. The Lord is among us'; but all the synagogue spoke to stone them with stones (Num. 14.6-10). 'The Lord said to Moses, "How long does this people provoke me? And how long do they not believe me for all the signs which I have done among them?" ' (.11). Such apostasies had continued under the rebel kings of Israel, and above all under Ahab. The Histories lesson opens with the faithful Elijah and Obadiah going in fear of their lives, and soon Israel is gathered to Mount Carmel to determine the issue of adherence to Yahweh or to Baal. This time, however, Yahweh makes his power known dramatically by burning up the sacrifice. To Mark such stories, and especially the rejection of Jesus son of Nave in the Law, were sad prophecies of the rejection of a greater Jesus. He had taught in the synagogue in his own country, and men had been scandalized at him. He had been able to do only a few healing miracles because of their unbelief, and had marvelled at their faithlessness. 'A prophet', he said, 'is not without honour, save in his own country.' Luke has already described the Rejection in Luke 4, with a sermon in Jesus' mouth referring to the flight of Elijah to Zarephath in 3 Kms 17—18. He therefore moves on to the following Marcan story, the Mission Charge, which also finds an appropriate text in the sidra. For in the first section the Numbers story told how Moses had obeyed God's command, 'Send (&jr6crreaov) you men ( ), one man per tribe' (13.2) to spy out the land of the Canaanites, and how the twelve had gone. Now Jesus calls together the Twelve, and sends them (drtfioTEiXev) to preach the gospel (9.1 ff.). But the influence of the Elijah cycle is apparent upon Luke also. Herod is disturbed by the

success of Jesus' movement, some saying that he was Elijah (9.8); and the instructions to the apostles to heal, and to remain in whatever house receives them, alike recall the story of Elijah at Zarephath. Matthew has reached the Syro-Phoenician woman in the Marcan sequence: perhaps her change in Matthew to a Canaanite is due to Jesus and Caleb entering the land of the Canaanites (Num. 13.3, etc.). Caleb means a dog: suitably to a story whose moral is that the dogs may share the children's food. KISLEV I

38. Num. 16—18/3 Kms 19/Isa. 48/Hag. 1

Mark 6.6b-13 (Matt. 15.29-31, Luke 9.10-17)

The Mission of the Twelve

The previous sidra contained the suggestion of the mission of Jesus' Twelve in the mission of the twelve spies by Moses; a fact exploited, as we have just seen, by Luke. Perhaps at an earlier stage the two incidents in Jesus' ministry, of the Rejection and the Mission, competed for exposition as the fulfilments of Law lesson 37, and Mark has ended by putting them side by side in consecutive weeks. But the Elijah story in 3 Kms 19 may also have seemed suggestive. There the prophet sets out without provision on his journey, and is supplied with food and drink. He is commanded to appoint Elisha as a prophet to succeed him, and the story ends with the call of Elisha to leave work and family and follow his master. So now does Jesus send the Twelve on their way without bread or money, and their needs will be supplied. They are to heal the sick and to stay where they find hospitality, as Elijah did at Zarephath and Elisha at Shunem. I have commented in Chapter 5 on Luke's development of the Elijah stories, and I will not repeat the account here: Matthew continues to follow the Marcan sequence, but generalizing the incident of the deaf stammerer. KISLEV II

39. Num. 19—22.1/3 Kms 20—21/Isa. 49/Hag. 2

Mark 6.14-29 (Matt. 15.32—16.1, Luke 9.18-27)

John and Herod(-ias)

The Elijah series now brings Mark to the climax of the struggle with the godless king Ahab and his ruthless wife Jezebel. Of his own, Ahab would have scrupled to take Naboth's vineyard by force, but such qualms did not disturb his heathen queen. Through her scheming Naboth was stoned to death, and the inheritance fell to the king. Jezebel intended the same murderous death for Elijah, for she said, 'So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not your life as the life of one of (the prophets of Baal) by tomorrow

about this time' (19.2); and but for divine interposition the same fate would have befallen him. Now to Mark, John is Elijah redivivus, appearing in the prophet's clothes with a leathern girdle about his loins (Mark 1.4, 6).1 He tells us that in John Elijah is come, and they have done to him whatever they listed, even as it is written of him (9.13). Where was it written in Scripture that John should be put to death, as Herod and his wife listed, more plainly than in 3 Kms 19/21? The weakness of Ahab is the foreshadowing of the weakness of Herod; the implacable spite of Jezebel foreshows the implacable spite of Herodias; the death of innocent Naboth is the 'prophecy' of the death of the innocent Baptist; the sword with which Jezebel swore to kill Elijah finds its mark in the dungeon of Herod's prison (3 Kms 19.1). Mark makes the point with Herod's superstitious speculation that Jesus is John risen from death; 'but others said, "It is Elijah" ' (6.15). Jesus is not John risen, but John was himself Elijah come down, as the following tale of his martyrdom now makes plain. KISLEV III 40. Num. 22.2—25.9/3 Kms 22/Isa. 50—51/Zech. 1 Mark 6.30-44 (Matt. 16.5-12, Luke 9.28-36)

The Feeding of the Five Thousand

The trouble with the Elijah saga, from Mark's point of view, is that some chapters, like 3 Kms 17, contain a wealth of suggestive material (the widow of Zarephath reminds the Christian preacher of the raising of Jairus' daughter and the Syro-Phoenician woman, and of Christ's feeding miracles besides); while other chapters, like Ahab's defeat at Ramoth-gilead, do not remind him of very much. But lest the reader should feel that such a comment would open the way to scepticism, Mark virtually quotes a verse from 3 Kms 22 to reassure him that our reconstruction is correct. Challenged by Ahab and Jehoshaphat, Micaiah says, 'I saw all Israel scattered upon the mountains as a flock without a shepherd' (.17). The words strike home at once to the Christian preacher: for did not Jesus 'have compassion on the multitude because they were as sheep not having a shepherd' (Mark 6.34)? It is the part of the biblical shepherd to feed his sheep, and Mark did not lack traditions that Jesus had marvellously fed the crowds in the desert, as Moses had before him in Num. 11, and Elijah in 3 Kms 17. But the detail of the feeding story is modelled on neither of these incidents, but upon the similar legend of Elisha feeding the hundred men in 4 Kms 4; and I postpone further discussion till we reach that chapter, and the corresponding piece in Mark, the Feeding of the Four Thousand. 1

D it omit 'and a leathern girdle around his waist'.

There is a similar reference in Num. 27.17, the sidra of the following week, to the appointment of Jesus son of Nave as Moses' successor, 'so the congregation of the Lord shall not be as sheep without a shepherd'. KISLEV IV

41. Num. 25.10—29.40/4 Kms 1—2/Isa. 52/Zech. 2

Mark 6.45-55 (Matt. 16.13-28, Luke 9.37-43a)

The Walking on the Water

In 4 Kms 2 first Elijah and then Elisha divide the waters of the Jordan hither and thither, and pass over dryshod—perhaps a not very evident text on which to hang the story of Jesus' walking the water of the sea of Galilee. More impressively, the disciple sees his master supernaturally lifted from the earth by a whirlwind; and we recall the divine whirlwind of 3 Kms 19.11, in which Elijah was warned that the Lord would pass by (l8oi> jiapeXeOaexai Kupio?). So now Jesus goes up the mountain to pray alone, like Elijah. The disciples labour in the boat against the driving wind, icod fjOetav jtapsXGeTv auiou?, 'he wished to pass by them' (6.48). The riddle of this curious expression1 is resolved against the Kingdoms background: jtapEXOetv is the technical word for a divine apparition. The disciples' supposing that he is a ghost, their cries and terror, the ceasing of the wind, their incomprehension, all testify Mark's wish to describe a Christophany. The loaves should have told them that Jesus was God's Son (.52): of course he can pass by them on the water as God passed by Elijah on Horeb, and Elisha at his master's assumption. DEDICATION

Serial Festal Sidrot: Num. 7—8.4 Sabbath: 42. Num. 30—32/4 Kms 3 ^ t / I s a . 53/Zech. 3—4.7

25th Kislev: Mark 7.1-23 (Matt. 17.1-13) 26th: Mark 7.24-30 (Matt. 17.14-23) 27th: Mark 7.31-7 (Matt. 17.24-7) 28th: Mark 8.1-10 (Matt. 18.1-10) 29th: Mark 8.11-26 (Matt. 18.12-20) 30th: Mark 8.27—9.1 (Matt. 18.21-35) 1st Tebeth: Mark 9.2-13 (Matt. 19.1-15) 2nd: Mark 9.14-29 (Matt. 19.16-30) Sunday: Luke 9.43b-48

Washing and Food (Korban) The Syro-Phoenician Woman The Deaf Stammerer The Four Thousand The Disciples' Blindness and the Blind Bethsaidan Caesarea Philippi The Transfiguration The Possessed Boy The Greatest

Dedication has a dual significance, as is to be seen from the covering letters at the beginning of 2 Maccabees which commend its 1

cf. Nineham, op. cit., p. 184; T. Snoy, 'Marc 6, 48: " . . . et il voulait les d6passer". Proposition pour la solution d'une 6nigme\ in M. Sabbe (ed.), Vtvangile selon Marc (Gembloux 1974), pp. 347-63.

observance. It commemorates the rededication of the sanctuary by Judas Maccabaeus in 164 B.C., looking back to the dedication of the Tabernacle and Temple, when the glory of God took possession of the shrine. It looks forward to the coming of mercy, and God's gathering of his people from everywhere under heaven to worship there (2 Macc. 2.7, '. . . until God gather the people again together, and mercy come'; 2.18, 'in God we have hope, that he will quickly have mercy upon us, and gather us together out of all the earth into the holy place'). The serial sidra is traditionally Num. 7 (where the Temple gifts are 'dedicated'), extending to 8.4 (the setting up of the lamps). The haphfarah for the sabbath is Zech. 3—4.7, of which ch. 3 describes Jeshua's clothing with clean vestments, and ch. 4.1-7 the vision of the lamps (cf. Num. 8.1-4). To judge from Luke's Gospel, Dedication might also be the occasion of the enrolling of catechumens for the Church: the Lucan catechism began the second Saturday in Tebeth. 1 Tabernacles ends on 22nd Tishri, and Dedication begins on 25th Kislev: there are normally sixty-one days between, or nine Saturdays, so I have allowed nine—one in Tishri, four in Cheshvan and four in Kislev. This brings us to Mark 7.1-23, a lesson of rather a different type from those of the preceding weeks, and an apt commentary on the Dedication sidra. For the Law passage is concerned with the gifts (Sfflpov, qorbanam, Num. 7.3, 10, etc.) dedicated for the Tabernacle, and the word Sfflpo\\qorban occurs 28 times in the chapter. What incident in Jesus' ministry was such repetition bound to recall to Mark? Had not the Pharisees criticized Jesus for eating with common hands, and had he not replied indignantly against the wellknown Pharisaic casuistry that permitted the evasion of a man's duty to his father under pretence of a Korban-vow? The presence of the Hebrew form in the Marcan story suggests that the association with Dedication went back to churches that read the Law in Hebrew. Nor is the Korban reference the only link with the festival, whose sidra describes day after day the sanctification of chargers and bowls for the use of the Tabernacle. The whole protracted sequence evokes the contempt of the Christian for that streak of Jewish piety which baptizes cups and plates and vessels of bronze, and condemns as common and unholy the unwashen hands of the poor and their unapproved diet. Hypocrites! It is not washing which keeps the hands from being common, and it is what comes out of the mouth, not what goes in, that makes it common. Sanctification comes from keeping God's commands in the Bible, not from the man-made oral law. 1

See above, p. 92.

The theme of the Dedication offerings being thus dealt with on the first day, Mark turns to the universalist aspect of the festival on the 26th. The Jews prayed to God to gather his people from all the world to his Temple, and a Marcan Christian may think of Jesus' mission to the world, exemplified in his visit to Tyre and Sidon. The haphfarah for the Saturday, from the Histories series, has now brought us to 4 Kms 3—4, which includes the petition of the Shunammite woman for her dying son to the prophet Elisha. It was at Tyre that Jesus had responded similarly to the faith of the Syro-Phoenician woman interceding for her possessed daughter; and the Elisha story is a pair to the petition of the woman of Sarepta in Sidonia in 3 Kms 17. The presence of these two stories in the Histories could hardly fail to bring to Christian remembrance Jesus' healing of the Syro-Phoenician woman's daughter; and the Dedication message, that all the world is to gather to God's worship, is principally expounded in the incident. Here alone in Mark is God's mercy extended beyond Israel to the humble Gentile who was content with the crumbs from the children's table. For the 27th, Mark has a story which fulfils the prophecies of Isa. 35.5 f., with which he began the Gospel. 'The eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf (KOXIXSV) shall hear. Then the lame shall leap like a hart, and the tongue of the stammerers (noyiXaXfflv) shall speak plainly.' A man is brought to Jesus who is deaf and a stammerer (Kto<|>dv icod jioyiXdXov). Jesus spits and touches his tongue and ears, a n d his hearing is opened a n d the string of his

tongue loosed: the crowd comment, 'He has done all things well; he even makes the deaf hear and the dumb speak.' The 'fulfilment' is very likely to be pre-Marcan, for the word 'Ephphatha', which Jesus speaks, is Hebrew and not Aramaic; 1 and the Hebrew verb following 'the ears of the deaf' is tippathahna, the same verb. The story speaks of the man's hearing being opened, so it is likely that the prophecy was associated with it in the Palestinian church; and perhaps even Jesus may have used the word himself in conscious fulfilment of Isaiah. Mark had other fulfilments of Isa. 35 at New Year, but the story goes well at the beginning of a catechesis that displays Jesus' power to heal in fulfilment of prophecy, and beyond the frontiers of Palestine. With the 28th we come to the second Feeding story; and alongside the raising of the Shunammite woman's son in 4 Kms 4, which I have already related to the Syro-Phoenician woman in Mark 7, stands the incident of Elisha's miraculous feeding in 4 Kms 4.42 ff. There is no more obvious pair of parallel incidents between the two 1

J. A. Emerton, 'Maranatha and Ephphatha', JTS 18.2 (1967), 427 ff.

Testaments than the feedings by Elisha and Jesus, and it may be well to say something here about their relationship. First, it is a familiar feature of the Elijah-Elisha complex that the master bequeathed to the disciple a double portion of his spirit, and that whatever the former had done the latter did also, and often more impressively. So Elijah prayed and the meal and oil were miraculously increased for the woman at Sarepta; while Elisha spoke and twenty barley-loaves and fig-cakes sufficed a hundred men. It is accordingly the second feeding which has become the dominant influence on the Gospel; and Mark provides two versions of it, one, as we have seen, in exposition of the sheep-without-a-shepherd text in 3 Kms 22, the other here. The primary reason for the two Gospel feedings is that there were two Old Testament feedings to fulfil, one in the Elijah-, one in the Elisha-cycle: but 4 Kms 4.42 ff. is the principal type for both the Marcan stories. Some of the parallels are obvious. Elisha said to his servant, 'Give ye to the people and let them eat': Jesus said to the Twelve about the Five Thousand, 'You give them something to eat' (6.37); he hints the same with the Four Thousand, but does not say it, 'I have compassion on the crowd . . . ' (8.2). Elisha's servant expresses incredulity, 'Why should I set this before a hundred men?': with the Five Thousand the apostles may be either obedient or incredulous, 'Are we to (AT) go and buy two hundred denarii worth of bread, and give it to them to eat?' (6.37); with the Four Thousand, they are certainly incredulous, 'How can one feed these men here in the desert?' (8.4). Elisha repeats his command, and promises a superfluity: Jesus in both cases asks how many loaves are available, makes arrangements and divides them. Elisha's story ends, 'And they ate and left, according to the word of the Lord': and the quantities of broken pieces remaining are detailed in both of Jesus' feedings. Some are less obvious. The Marcan church knew that Jesus had drawn large crowds to hear him, sometimes in remote places, far exceeding Elisha's hundred men; and recourse is therefore had to exegesis au pied de la lettre in the Rabbinic manner. How many pieces of food had the prophet to hand? 'Of the flrstfruits twenty barley-loaves and fig-cakes (no&deotg, karmel)'. It is ambiguous. We should think, 'Twenty loaves and some fig-cakes': if a number was required, we might think, 'Twenty loaves and (twenty) fig-cakes', as one says 'Six knives and forks'. That would give the prophet forty pieces of food with which to work. How many men were present? The story does not say: all that is said is the servant's protest, 'Why should I set this before a hundred men?' This (toOto, zeh):

plainly (to the interpreting church) he was holding up a single loaf or cake. So the number 'written' as fed becomes 40 x 100, or 4,000. So large a figure then becomes influential upon the second, earlier feeding. During Elijah's famine, it was written (3 Kms 18.4) that Abdiu took a hundred prophets and hid them by fifties in a cave, and fed them with bread. No question but that there are only a total of a hundred men this time, but the effect is the same. Mark imagines the crowd as set out in parties and clumps, as in the Kingdoms story, 'by hundreds and by fifties'. As the later feeding was of four thousands, formed by multiplying a hundred by forty, so here he may multiply a hundred groups of fifty men, or vice versa, and reach five thousands. Such a process assumes what is in any case evident, that the later feeding story was composed in outline earlier in time. For not only is it the second in the Gospel, and so parallel to the Elisha feeding which has been the shaping force to both Gospel stories; it is also at every point less elaborate than the Five Thousand. It has a smaller crowd, fed with more loaves, and leaving fewer baskets of a smaller design. Jesus only implies in it that the apostles are to feed the crowd; it is in the Five Thousand that they are commanded so to do, almost in Elisha's words. The apostles are certainly incredulous in the Four Thousand; perhaps obedient, and so more respectful, with the Five. The Four Thousand has Jesus give thanks (etixapioTfiCTcxs, 8.6) over the bread, as was general in the Pauline churches (1 Cor. 11.24); in the Five Thousand this has been assimilated to Jesus' blessing (ei>A.6YriaEv, 6.41) the bread as at the Last Supper (14.22). Even so, there are probably some details in the two stories which have grown after they reached their present position, being more easily explained as the influence of the Five Thousand on the Four. The Elisha story gives the number of loaves, and once the size of the two crowds is fixed, it is natural to inquire how many loaves Jesus had available on each occasion. Clearly, as the greater-than-Elisha, he will not have needed as many as twenty (forty). Five loaves for five thousand men might seem a suitable provision: especially as Mark has referred earlier to the story of how David hungered, and was fed (in Samuel) with five of the twelve Shewbread loaves. This would in turn suggest that there were seven loaves for the second feeding. As there were twelve Shewbread loaves set forth before the Lord continually on behalf of the people of Israel (Lev. 24.8), so Jesus takes twelve loaves to feed God's people now; first five, like David, and then the remaining seven. The same 'twelve' symbolism covers the quantities remaining, which also require specifying if the

detail is to produce its effect. Twelve large baskets of crumbs may perhaps symbolize the coming feeding of the nations, who are to make up the New Israel along with the Jews; for the Syro-Phoenician woman accepts that she is to be fed with the crumbs that fall from the children's bread. Seven smaller baskets are a suitable remnant from the feeding with seven loaves, without any particular meaning. But the general significance of the two feedings is cardinal, and Mark stresses it by appending to the second the conversation in the boat. The point is that Jesus has been revealed as the one who fulfils the Kingdoms Scriptures, who is God's Son feeding multitudes in the desert as God did in Numbers, who is the one loaf that feeds the Church Sunday by Sunday, the loaf that must be kept free from Pharisaic corruption. No Marcan Christian must be blind and deaf to these great truths as the apostles were (8.11-21). The priority of the Four Thousand story is a fact of considerable moment. We have just observed that the Deaf Stammerer takes up the Isa. 35 prophecies which were in Mark's mind at New Year; and it is a platitude that the Transfiguration reproduces the salient features of the Baptism, and that in other ways the Gospel seems to take a new start at about this point. 1 Why should this be? It is because

the

liturgical structure

of the

Church's

Gospels

developed

backwards. From the year after the crucifixion, the Church would wish to remember Jesus' Passion at Passovertide. Other stories about him could be told as seemed suitable on other Saturdays: but the Passion story would be told at Passover. Hence the different tone of the Passion story from that in the rest of the Gospel: 'a close-packed, purposeful, and coherent narrative, with precise geographical and temporal reference'.2 It achieved a viscous form quickly, in the 30s, by regular and solemn repetition on the anniversary of Jesus' death. As the Church became more organized, baptism ceased to be done on the spot, but took place increasingly at Easter time, just as proselytes were admitted into Jewry in time for Passover; and the custom arose of preparing the catechumens in the traditional Jewish way, listening to the Book of Deuteronomy read in the weeks before Passover and to sermons expounding it. So developed a second section of the tradition, increasingly fixed in order, content a n d wording, a catechetical series of pericopae from

Dedication to Passover. But a catechetical series, set as Jesus' journey up to his Passion at Jerusalem, inevitably invites expansion backwards again. Why not form the Gospel-stories of the weeks preceding 1 2

8.27 is taken in many commentaries as 'the watershed'. Nineham, op. cit., p. 365, citing Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus (E.T., London 1966), p. 62.

Dedication into a continuous series, making an account of the whole ministry of Jesus? This is what Mark himself has done, transforming a catechism-and-Passion narrative into a Gospel, with a series of paragraphs from New Year to Dedication. And finally the unsatisfactoriness of a series of stories which covers only the six and a half months from New Year to Easter ultimately invites a final extension backwards. Both Matthew and Luke provide extensions back to the Saturday following the Easter octave, the one with the emphasis on the fulfilment of the Jewish festivals, the other attempting that of the weekly readings, in order. I have argued above1 that we have such a series of catechetical sermons preserved for us in Luke's Journey narrative; and we have a catechism-outline from the second century in the Didache. The interest of the Didache lies in part in the structure of the work. Its first part is an exposition of the Two Ways, of Life and of Death (1-6); this is a straightforward catechetical outline, following the two ways of Deuteronomy, and expounding the Great Commandment (Deut. 6.5; Did. 1.2), and the Ten Commandments (Deut. 5.7 ff.; Did. 2.5). But this, as the second part (7-15) shows, is an outline for the benefit of teachers in outlying churches, who are given instruction in such matters as baptism, celebrating the eucharist, and receiving visiting teachers. Towards the end of this section (14), directions are given for the breaking of bread 'on the Lord's Lord's day'.2 The doubled expression, coupled with the fact that instructions for a normal eucharist have already been given in 9, show that it is Easter Day which is intended.3 The Catechism (1-6) led on to the rules for Baptism at Easter (7), and in thought to the fasts (8) associated with it; but rules for ordinary weekday fasts in fact took over at this point, leading on to Sunday eucharists (9 f.), and the problems of visiting preachers at them (11-13). With 14 the Didachist returns to the Easter eucharist, for which he uses the word 9uo(a, sacrifice.4 Jews ate the Passover Ouota (Exod. 12.27), 1

pp. 90 ff., above. Kara Kuptaicfiv St Kupiou, the MS reading, should certainly be preferred on account of its difficulty to the Georgian version's, 'On the day of the Lord', a simplifying gloss which is accepted by J. P. Audet, La DidacM, Instructions des Apdtres (Paris 1958), p. 460. Kupioocr) means Sunday, as is almost universal in later Greek (cf. W. Rordorf, Sunday (E.T., London 1968), pp. 205 ff.). 'The Lord's Sunday' is naturally Easter, in contradistinction to Ttdoxa, which meant Passover to the earliest Church; cf. C. W. Dugmore, 'Lord's Day and Easter', Neotestamentica et Patristica, NT Suppl. VI (Leiden 1962), 272-81. 3 Compare Justin, who describes the Easter eucharist at I Apol. 65-6, and the weekly eucharist at I Apol. 67. 4 Audet, op. cit., p. 462, derives the notion of sacrifice here from Ps. 51, but this appears far-fetched.

2

and Paul says that Christ our Passover was sacrificed (6rt8ri) for us (1 Cor. 5.7). The Christian's Paschal sacrifice must be pure, so special precautions are to be taken, with public confession, reconciliation, and if necessary peaceful reproval under the chairmanship of honoured bishops and deacons;1 and ultimately excommunication in the event of obduracy. Such elaborate procedures would be impracticable as a weekly discipline, but could be edifying as an annual preparation for Easter. The final chapter (16) seals the Easter preparations: 'Be watchful . . . for ye know not the hour in which your Lord cometh . . . In the last days the false prophets and corrupters shall be multiplied . . . and love shall be turned into hate. For as lawlessness increaseth, they shall hate one another and shall persecute and betray. And then the world-deceiver shall appear ( ) and shall work signs and wonders ( ) and he shall do unholy things which have not been since the world began . . . They that endure in their faith shall be saved by the Curse himself. And then shall the signs of the truth appear . . . The Lord shall come and all his saints with him. Then shall the world see the Lord coming on the clouds of heaven.' The Church, following the Jews,2 expected their redemption at Passover; so all catechetical teaching in the Church ended with the charge to be ready, and with a description of the Lord's coming. All three Synoptic Gospels preface their Passion stories with some such material immediately preceding; and the catechetical scheme in the Didache ends its Easter preparation material with the same, quoting Matt. 24 and 25 repeatedly. We thus have a reason provided for two further basic features of Mark's Gospel which are noted in every commentary: that it is a 1

The Didachist permits his thought to wander on a number of occasions, but he returns reassuringly to the point from which he left. At 14.1,2 the Christian is to confess his sins and be reconciled with his brother; at 15.1 f. worthy bishops and deacons are 'therefore' to be appointed and honoured; 'and', at 15.3 f., 'reprove one another, not in anger but in peace . . . ' Confession and reconciliation, peaceful reproach (and if necessary, 'sending to Coventry', 15.4) are all part of the same preparation for the pure sacrifice. The worthy bishops come in because without them orderly reconciliation would be quite impracticable. Audet misses the point of the 'therefore', p. 464, referring it back to the breaking of bread at 14.1. In the same way Did. 7 gives instructions on baptism (at Easter), including the pre-baptismal fast (7.4); this leads into a long digression on weekly fasts and daily prayers (8), weekly eucharist (9 f.), prophets (11-13); and return is then made to the Easter liturgy in 14-16. The sentence at the end of 10, 'But permit the prophets to offer thanksgiving as much as they desire', similarly initiates a digression of three chapters, the eucharist theme being resumed at 14. 2 See below, p. 293.

Passion story with an extended introduction; and that, with the exception of matter in 3.23—4.32, the teaching in Mark is largely concentrated after Peter's Confession. The Gospel is, in fact, a Passion story with two introductions. The earlier introduction, comprising roughly our Mark 7—13, was the catechesis of the Marcan church, and covered such matters as the cost of discipleship (8.34—9.1), Jesus as God's Son (9.2-13), his power to deliver from demons through a Christian's prayer (9.14-29), the preciousness of new converts who must not be caused to stumble (9.33-50), divorce rules (10.1-12), the acceptability of children in the church (10.13-16), the Christian Commandment of poverty (10.17-31), the need of humility (10.34-45), etc. Several of these topics are mentioned in Hebrews as 'the elementary doctrine of Christ' (6.1): a foundation of repentance from dead works (cf. Mark 7.1-23) and faith towards God (cf. the Syro-Phoenician, 7.24 ff.; Bartimaeus, 10.52; the fig tree, 11.22), with instruction about baptisms and laying on of hands (the children, 10.13 ff.), the resurrection of the dead (the sons of Zebedee, 10.35 ff.; the Sadducees, 12.18-27) and eternal judgement (the apocalyptic discourse). As it is catechesis, it naturally consists largely of teaching, whether directly or through edifying stories. The whole is set in the context of Jesus' journey up to his Passion at Jerusalem (8.31 ff.; 9.30 ff.; 10.32 ff.; 11—12), the 'way' on which the catechumen is now to set out. This catechesis is preceded by a second 'introduction', Mark 1—6, consisting of the stories which have become customarily told for the earlier period of the year, from New Year to Dedication. Of course these contain some teaching, for some teaching is suited to preaching the themes of Tabernacles in 3.7—4.34; but in general it is the deeds of Jesus which provide the most memorable fulfilments of the Law and the Prophets across this quarter of the year. In this connection it may be helpful to recapitulate in a table the Marcan fulfilments of the Elijah-Elisha themes as I have traced them: Mark 5.35-43 Raising of Jairus' 3 Kms 17 Daughter 6.1-6a A Prophet without 18 Honour 6.6b-13 Mission of Twelve 19 6.14-29 Herod, Herodias, John Baptist 6.30-44 Feeding of Five Thousand

Raising of Widow's Son Elijah at Carmel

Elijah's Journey, Call of Elisha 21 Ahab, Jezebel, Naboth 22.17 Sheep without a Shepherd

6.45-55 Walking on Water 4 Kms 2 7.24-30 Syro-Phoenician Woman 8.1-10

Feeding of Four Thousand

Crossing Jordan dryshod (cf. 3 Kms 19) 4.8 ff. Shunammite Woman (cf. 3 Kms 17) 4.42 ff. Elisha's Feeding of 100 Men

Jairus' daughter, the Baptist's death, the Syro-Phoenician woman, and the Four Thousand are impressive parallels, and the whole sequence follows the order of the stories in the Former Prophets. For the 29th Kislev Mark sets the Blind Bethsaidan, preceded by the boat journey from Dalmanutha, where the Pharisees' demand for a sign had driven Jesus to despair (8.11-26). This generation shall have no sign from heaven, but only healings performed in private. Isa. 35 taught that the eyes of the blind should be opened when God came to save his people, as well as the ears of the deaf, and the tongue of the dumb being loosed. The Bethsaidan's healing follows the pattern of the Decapolitan's, with the sufferer being brought by friends, with his being taken aside by Jesus, with the use of spittle and touching, and the charge to secrecy. The intervening conversation in the boat shows the approach of Mark's sermon. The apostles were at first deaf and blind to God's saving action (8.17-21), as deaf and blind spiritually as the sufferers were literally whom Jesus healed. The catechumens, hitherto deaf and blind, will now have their eyes and ears opened.1 The central truth which they are to hear and see is made plain on the 30th with Peter's Confession. This Jesus, whose healings they have heard described, was the Christ. It was Peter whose eyes were first opened to see this truth, and this is the central thing which the catechumen has to understand—he was not John or Elijah (Elijah again) or one of the prophets, but the Christ. But the word 'Christ' is easily misunderstood, and Jesus told them not to use the term at first. He was not to be a conquering King, but a suffering one, like the king in the psalms who is called the son of man, the same phrase being found in Daniel. Jesus knew he must suffer at the hands of the chief priests, and die, and after three days—three and a half days in Daniel—rise again. And everyone who wishes to be Christ's disciple must take up his cross. They will be challenged to recant, and if they save their lives in this world by so doing, they will lose them in eternity. The Son of Man will return any year now—he 1

Justin calls baptism 'illumination', and the baptized the 'illuminated*, I Apol. 61, 65; cf. also the washing of the man born blind in John 9.

said, in the lifetime of those standing by—and of those who have denied him he will be ashamed. But it must be made plain that the Church's faith does not hang upon Peter's insight and Jesus' words alone: it was ratified by God from heaven, as Mark tells in the Transfiguration story, on 1st Tebeth. Whatever history may lie behind it we shall never know. As it stands, the story has been developed from the Dedicationtide theme of God's glory descending upon his Tabernacle, glossed with the visions of Elijah and Moses. Elijah ascended Mount Horeb, and God passed before him there; and Moses before ascended Sinai in a similar way, accompanied by three companions, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and saw the God of Israel (Exod. 24). Then the cloud covered the mountain; the glory of the Lord settled on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days, and on the seventh day he called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud. Now Jesus takes Peter, James, and John up a high mountain, and there appears to them Elijah with Moses; a cloud overshadows them, and they hear a voice from the cloud, 'This is my beloved Son; listen to him'. So the catechumen knows that Jesus' Christhood and Sonship were confirmed by God himself, and that it is to the Son of God's teaching that he must listen. Other details for the Transfiguration the Marcan church took from the Dedication haphfarah (Zech. 3—4.7), where Jesus was clothed in filthy garments which are replaced by rich garments and a clean mitre: the garments of Jesus the son of God glisten intensely white, so as no fuller on earth can whiten them. Satan was standing by, too, and the Lord said to Satan, 'The Lord rebuke you, O Satan' (3.1 f.); cf. Mark 8.33, '(Jesus) rebuked Peter, and said, "Get behind me, Satan!".' It is not surprising that when Mark extended the serial readings back to New Year, he felt in need of a word from heaven as at the Transfiguration, and so constructed the similar scene of Jesus' Baptism. In the meantime the catechumen needs to be made clear on the position of Elijah, who has been so often mentioned. Elijah ascended, and, as Malachi said, is to come and restore all things before the Day of the Lord (4.5 f.): well, he has already come, in the shape of John Baptist, and has brought men to repentance, and has suffered the death intended for him by Jezebel in his former lifetime. For the 2nd Tebeth, the eighth day of the feast, Mark sets the Possessed Boy. Dedication closes with the end of Jesus' expedition into foreign parts, and 9.30 can begin, 'And they went on from there, and passed through Galilee': the world mission theme is complete. The force of the pericope here is to assure the catechumen that Jesus has the power to cast out evil spirits, and that permanently.

Intending Christians were regarded in the first centuries as being still infested with evil spirits, and in need of exorcism before their baptism. In Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition1 catechumens are exorcized daily during the final period of their instruction, and on Holy Saturday, 'the bishop () shall exorcize every evil spirit to flee away from them, and never to return to them thenceforward'. The stress on faith—'All things are possible to him who believes' (9.23)— also fits in well with the 'elementary doctrine' of Heb. 6.1: thus is laid the foundation of faith towards God. So ends the Marcan Dedication. How Matthew transferred the Transfiguration to the beginning of the feast, and turned the rest into a discourse of church law, I have described elsewhere.2 Luke does not believe in Jewish feasts, especially in non-biblical ones, and he limits himself to a single pericope for the Sunday. TEBETH I

43. Num. 33—36/4 Kms 5—6.23/Isa. 54/Zech. 4.8—5.11

Mark 9.30-50 (Matt. 20.1-16) cf. Luke 9.49-50 Little Ones The presence of catechumens in the church is a fact imposing urgent duties upon established Christians. First, there is the spiritual lesson of humility. There is to be no self-importance in Christ's church, and here one's mind goes back to the lamentable occasion when Jesus had foretold his own humiliation the second time: but instead of understanding, the disciples had squabbled about who should be the greatest. No, said Jesus, if any man would be first, he should be minister of all. He had set a child in the midst of them, and said that receiving such a child in his name was receiving him, and so was receiving God who sent him (9.30-7). The church is now about to receive such little ones, and by making sure that such catechumens become settled in the church we shall truly be receiving our Lord. Such pastoral care in Christ's name is a humble task, but yields true greatness. The treatment of catechumens is a critical matter, and draws the strongest language in the Gospel. Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Christ to stumble would be better drowned with a millstone round his neck; better forfeit eye or hand or foot than thus go to perdition. John had been foolish enough to try to stop an exorcist using Christ's name without being a disciple. But the church should be liberal to such people, or to those who were kind enough to give food and drink to her missionaries, even though they 1 2

20.2, citation 20.8.

MLM, pp. 393 ff.

themselves might not at once become Christians; they would not quickly speak evil of him, and might be baptized soon (.38-41). Pastoral care of such is vital: whatever the cause of offence, whatever the cause of your stumbling in your duty to such little ones, however precious, cut it off rather than go to hell (.43-8). For everyone will be salted with fixe (.49): salt and fire are both purifying agents, and the Church too must undergo the test—as Paul puts it, 'each man's work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done' (1 Cor. 3.13). But the natural salt which purifies also preserves, and so forms a fine image for the grace of Christ, making peace in his community, as well as isolating the unworthy; as Paul says again, 'Let your word be always in grace, seasoned with salt' (Col. 4.6 AT). This salt is good, and indeed irreplaceable: if the salt becomes saltless, how will you season it? (.50a). So Mark is able to end where he began the pericope for the week. Do not quarrel about greatness (.33 f.): have the salt of Christ's grace among you, and be at peace with one another (.50b). The difficulty of finding a thread of thought running through this passage is a commonplace; and it is evident that it is in part a collection of sayings linked by association of key-words, 'little ones', 'in Christ's name', 'scandalize', 'salt'. But the lectionary theory is able to supply a plausible context for this collection, and its place in the Gospel, which is otherwise lacking. The catechumens have now been enrolled, taught that Jesus is the Christ, God's Son, and that they must take up their cross if they are to follow him. The established members of the Church have their duty too: to care for these little ones, to win those on the margin, to cause none of them to stumble, but to see them safely in with the salt of humility and peace. Luke covers the same matter in 9.43b-50, which come in the same season in my Table, Kislev V and Tebeth I. Luke no doubt intended the verses as one pericope, and subdivision for two Saturdays is for a formal reason only. Deuteronomy was read over eleven weeks, and it would be natural therefore to begin it, and Luke 9.51 ff. alongside it, on Tebeth II, leaving three Saturdays in Tebeth, four in Shebat and four in Adar. There are 88 or 89 days in the preceding three months, twelve weeks and four or five days, so that thirteen readings would often suffice for these three months and Tebeth I; in the years when there was a fourteenth Saturday, the pericope could either be divided after 9.48, or be repeated. He has shortened Mark's material considerably, as he has the scandalizing and salt sayings elsewhere, in Q-contexts.

TEBETH I I

Mark

44. Deut. 1—3.22/4 Kms 6.24—7.20/Isa. 55/Zech. 6

10.1-16

(Matt.

20.17-28;

Luke 9.51—10.24)

Divorce and Children

The advancing sidrdt now move into Deuteronomy, 'The words which Moses spoke to all Israel beyond Jordan'. The Marcan catechesis has Jesus traversing the same ground as he teaches: 'And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again' (10.1). The topic that it develops is the question of divorce and remarriage: it occurs later in Deuteronomy (24.1 ff.), but it was the Church's experience that matters of domestic propriety were primary. In the Apostolic Tradition those being admitted as catechumens were examined first of all on their marital status, and informed of the Church's discipline on divorce and remarriage, before their three-year instruction began. 1 Then there was the further question whether children should be admitted to the Church, and this was again resolved on a liberal basis, remembering Jesus' indignation with the disciples who prevented small children being brought to him. Of such is the kingdom of God, and no one who does not accept the kingdom with a child's simplicity has any part in it. It is to be noted how little connection there has been with the Law and Prophets lections for the day since the catechesis began, in contrast to the regular strong links in Mark 1—8.21. Luke 2 deserts Mark at this point and writes his own catechesis 'in order': with the sending of disciples, and of the seventy before Jesus' face, like Moses' embassies, and other matters from Deut. 1—3; with Jesus' coming assumption and the threat to call down fire from heaven, and other matters reminiscent of Elijah in 4 Kms 1—3. Matthew presses on in the Marcan order with the Sons of Zebedee, which lacks lectionary correspondence. TEBETH I I I

Mark

45.

10.17-31

Deut. (Matt.

3.23—7.11/4 20.29-34,

Kms 8/Isa. 56/Zech.

Luke

10.25—11.13)

7

The Rich Man

In Deut. 5 there is a recapitulation of the Ten Commandments, and to this is attracted the story of the Rich Man, for it is of primary importance that every intending Christian should understand Jesus' adaptation of them. The rich man wanted eternal life, and Jesus pointed him to the Commandments, which he recited; but Jesus said there was one thing which he still lacked—he must go and sell his all, 1

J

16.6.

See pp. 90 ff., above,

and give it away, and eternal life would be his. The Marcan church recognized, like many a preacher since, that this was putting the price of salvation rather high for many, and the matter is watered down in the remarks following to a weak, 'All things are possible with God.' But the rewards of Christian poverty are nevertheless asserted with eloquence. Luke 1 begins his homily with the similar story of the lawyer who asked Jesus how he should inherit eternal life, but who responds to Jesus' reply with the Shema' from Deut. 6 rather than the Commandments from Deut. 5; the evangelist adapts the Chronicles version of Elisha's capture of the Syrians to form the Good Samaritan, and the woman's shutting the door on herself and her children to teach importunity in prayer, both from 4 Kms 4—6. TEBETH

IV

46.

Deut. 7.12—11.25/4 Kms 9—10/Isa. 57/Zech.

8

Mark 10.32-45 (Matt 21.1-13, Luke 11.14-54) The Sons of Zebedee During Dedication, Jesus' prophecy of his coming sufferings was used to challenge the catechumens to the possibility of their own martyrdom (8.31-8). At the end of the feast a similar prophecy led on to the call to be last of all and servant of all (9.30-7). Now a similar prophecy is used a third time, and combines the two morals. James and John missed the point of Jesus' words, and came to claim the best places at the Messianic banquet; they had to be content with the promise that they should share the cup of his passion and be baptized with the baptism of his sufferings. Jesus had continued by saying that the Church would not be like Gentile kingdoms, but whoever would be the first in it must be the slave of all: for the Son of Man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. It looks as if Jesus' anticipation of his Passion was used as a starting point for teaching intending Christians both to be humble and to expect martyrdom, and that the cores of three different homilies have survived with this same starting point to each. A second point of interest is the concentrated Isaiah background to the pericope. Our rule-of-thumb division of Isaiah has brought us to Isa. 57 as the Isaiah reading for the week, but when we went through the Lucan Isaiah parallels2 there was some indication that this was too far on. For the current week, for example, there is the division of the spoils of the strong man at Luke 11.22, as a possible reminiscence of Isa. 53.12. Now there are several likely Isaiah references from about the same area in Mark 10.32-45. First, Jesus' 1 2

See pp. 96, 147 f., above. pp. 171-4, above.

Passion prophecy is distinctive at .34, 'they will mock him, and spit upon him and scourge him': cf. Isa. 50.6, 'I gave my back to scourges, and my cheeks to blows; and I turned not away my face from the shame of spitting.'' Neither the scourging nor the spitting are mentioned in the earlier Passion prophecies. Secondly, Christ's sufferings are here for the first time symbolized as a cup, which he is to drink, and the sons of Zebedee too; cf. Isa. 51.17 ff., 'Jerusalem that hast drunk at the hand of the Lord the cup of his fury: for thou hast drunk out and drained the cup of calamity, the bowl of wrath. . . . I have taken out of thine hand the cup of calamity . . . ' Third, there is the famous saying at 10.45 on the Son of Man's ministering (Siaicovetv), and giving his life a ransom for many; cf. Isa. 52.3, 'For thus saith the Lord, You were sold for nothing, and you will not be ransomed for silver', 52.13 ff., 'Behold, my servant (nalz) . . . ' , and 53.12, 'He bore the sins of many, and was delivered because of their iniquities.' In all that has been written about Mark 10.45 and its relation to Isa. 53 I have not seen any comment on the cumulative weight of these references; and surely, taken together, they are significant, especially in the light of the possible Lucan reading of Isa. 53 in the same week. In the years when the Marcan church read Isaiah, it would appear that the 53rd chapter was reached with sidra 46, where Moses, in Deut. 9, interceded for the people and saved them from God's anger. The prophecy of Jesus' passion was then influenced by God's servant's sufferings in the chapter, or more exactly by the concrete details of spitting and scourging read a couple of weeks earlier. The cup image either chimes in with, or is suggested by, the cup imagery of the previous week; and the serving motif in Mark 10.43-4 suggests the applicability of Isaiah's servant's vicarious suffering in Mark 10.45. The doctrine of Christ's vicarious suffering Mark knows from Paul, though it is so little congenial to him that he hardly mentions it apart from here: the language telescopes the thought of two Isaiah chapters—all that survives is the 'many' from 53.12, and the 'ransom' from 52.3. The lectionary theory helps here to clear up a long-standing dispute: Mark does have Isa. 53 in mind, for it was read that Saturday. The place in the Isaiah cycle is confirmed when Mark cites Isa. 56 three pericopae later. A similar comment may elucidate the Matthaean reading at this point. While Matthew has fully exploited the festal themes of the Jewish year, he has not seemed to pay much attention to the sabbath readings, except where on occasion he has actually cited verses from them with his introductory formulae. We have not had such a citation for eight chapters, but there is one in this week's pericope, 'Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold your king . . a compound of Isa,

62.11. and Zech. 9.9. Our rule-of-thumb division of the Twelve has brought us to Zech. 8, and it could perhaps be that Matthew was a week ahead of this in his lections. In this way we could well understand how Matthew was content to be a couple of stories further on in the Marcan sequence. The Marcan account refers to Zech. 9.9, without quoting it, in a fortnight's time, so the first two Gospels straddle our reconstructed position for the chapter. I have commented fully on Luke's catechesis above, and shall not do so in future except where he can be seen to be dependent on Mark's. SHEBAT

I 47. Deut. 11.26—16.17/4 Kms 11—12/Isa. 58/Zech. 9

Mark 10.46-52 (Matt. 21.14-17; Luke 12.1—13.9) Bartimaeus The catechetical value of the story of Bartimaeus is often noted: the man who was blind and, as every intending Christian is, in need of enlightenment; who knew himself to be in need of Christ's mercy, and begged for it despite discouragement, as they need to seek Christ's mercy; to whom Jesus said, 'Your faith has saved you', as faith saves a Christian; who followed Jesus in the way, as catechumens are to be followers of Jesus, in his Way. Not so often noted are the Isaiah references, which occur in Isa. 54—55. 'The Lord hath called thee . . . For a little while I left thee . . . but with everlasting mercy will I have mercy on thee . . . so neither shall my mercy fail thee . . . Give heed with your ears and follow my ways ( ) and I will make with you an everlasting covenant, the sure mercies of David... Seek ye the Lord, and when ye find him, call; and when he draws nigh to you, let the ungodly leave his ways () and let him return to the Lord and he shall receive mercy' (54.6-8; 55.3, 6 f.). How natural that the Marcan church should recall the blind beggar who called upon Jesus as the son of David to have mercy on him, and who followed in the way with joy. Matthew has adapted the Marcan Cleansing of the Temple for his day's reading: he has inserted the healing of the blind and the lame, and brought children into the temple crying, 'Hosanna to the Son of David'. SHEBAT I I

48. Deut. 16.18—21.9/4 Kms 13—14/Isa. 59/Zech. 10

Mark 11.1-11 (Matt. 21.18-22, Luke 13.10—14.24) Triumphal Entry Hitherto the Marcan Saturday pericopae have been self-contained units, and it seems proper to assume that they continue so to be; I have already noted the coincidence of Zech. 9 with the season of the

year. Jesus enters Jerusalem on a colt on which no one has ever sat, while the people of the city spread their garments and branches in his way, crying, 'Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!' The fulfilment of Zech. 9.9 is evident: 'Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; proclaim aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, the King comes to thee, just and a saviour; he is meek and riding on an ass and a new colt'. Meekness is urged on Israel's kings in the sidra: their hearts may not be lifted up above their brethren (Deut. 17. 14-20). SHEBAT

III

49.

Deut. 21.10—25/4 Kms 15—16/Isa. 60/Zech. 11

Mark 11.12-25 (Matt. 21.23-7, Luke 14.25—16.13)

Cleansing of Temple Withering of Fig Tree

The division of the pericopae is not a straightforward matter. On the one hand we have a temporal continuity, with the Entry, the Cleansing of the Temple, and the Withering of the Fig Tree occurring on consecutive days (.12, 'on the following day', .20, 'in the morning'); so that the three paragraphs could be bound together as parts of one Saturday's reading. But the Entry seems to stand on its own, while the other two are intimately related, by both form and symbolism. The fig tree is cursed before the Cleansing, and is seen to be withered after it, thus providing a Marcan 'sandwich'; and there is the obvious symbolism of the fruitlessness of Israel's sacrifices, soon to be brought to a close (cf. also 12.1-9). There is also the matter of length: two pericopae of a dozen verses each seems more in line with what we have come to expect from Mark, rather than one of twenty-five verses. It seems better therefore to take the Entry on Shebat II, and the Fig Tree/Temple passage on the following week. The dominant influence seems to be Isa. 56, which would follow in Mark's Isaiah cycle soon after the Isa. 50—53 passages which have influenced Mark 10.32-45, and the Isa. 54—55 passages which may be related to Mark 10.46-52. The chapter contains the text which Jesus cites, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations' (.7; Mark 11.17). The imagery of the dried-up fig tree is in the same passage, where it is said, 'Let not the eunuch say, "I am a dry tree" ' (Isa. 56.3). What a contrast to the sidra (Deut. 23.1-6), where eunuchs and Ammonites and Moabites were barred from worship in the Temple! Further, Isa. 56 gives a lead on the topic of prayer, since it welcomes strangers and all comers to pray: 'I will gladden them in my house of prayer . .. My house shall be called a

house of prayer' (56.7). In this way it would be more easy to understand how Mark has come to link together the three themes: the drying up of the fig tree (11.12-14, 20-22), the cleansing of the Temple (.15-19), and prayer (.21-3). It may be also that the Marcan church still followed the Jewish traditions in another matter. 15th Shebat, according to the prevailing tradition, that of the house of Hillel,1 was the New Year of Fruit Trees: that is, the various tithes were payable according to whether the picking was before or after that date.2 (The house of Shammai made the date 1st Shebat.) Now, Mark has the fig tree story on the third Saturday in Shebat, Matthew on the second. The catechumen thus learns one practical lesson and one theoretical one. Christ is concerned for purity of worship among his followers. The Jews' unfruitful abuse of the privilege of God's Temple, with their money-making and their barring of outsiders, has ended in its destruction, like the withering of the fruitless fig. He, as a Gentile, is welcome to pray to the God whose house was to be for all nations. But let his praying be sincere. He needs to have faith in God, and he needs to forgive his neighbour. SHEBAT

IV 50. Deut. 26—29.9/4 Kms 17/Isa. 61 f./Zech. 12 f.

Mark 11.27—12.12 (Matt. 21.28-32, Luke 16.14—17.19) The Wicked Husbandmen The Question of Authority (Mark 11.27-33) is answered in Mark by the parable of the Husbandmen (12.1-12). 'And they came again to Jerusalem' (11.27a) marks the pericope off from its predecessor. 'And as he was walking in the temple, the chief priests and the scribes and the elders came to h i m . . . ' (.27b) gives us the antagonists of the story, who are first discomfited by Jesus' negative reply at 11.33, 'Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things'. But we require the same antagonists in 12.1, 'And he began to speak to them in parables'; and in 12.12, 'And they tried to arrest him, but feared the multitude, for they perceived that he had spoken the parable against them . . .' An indefinite 'they' will not fit the context; the chief priests or elders are needed for the attempted arrest. Further, the parable gains in point from the unity of the two paragraphs. In the previous lection Jesus cleansed the Temple, which was seen as fated like an unfruitful fig tree. In this the Temple authorities demand by what right Jesus does these things; he tells them that they are like husbandmen who will not pay the owner any of the fruits of the vineyard, and who are in time to be destroyed. The baptism of John was from heaven, 1 1

m R.H. 1.1. b R.H. 14a-15b.

whence Jesus was declared God's Son. He will not tell the authorities directly what right he possesses, but in a parable speaks of himself as the son of the vineyard owner. The parable falls happily alongside the readings, in a way that is too good to be accidental. Israel was commanded that when he came into the land which the Lord his God was giving him for an inheritance, and had inherited it, he should give of the first of the fruits of the land to the Lord his God, bringing them in a basket and worshipping (Deut. 26.1-11). If they served God and obeyed him, they would be blessed in all their doings: but if they did not serve God and disobeyed, he would bring on them all manner of evils, until he had destroyed them (Deut. 28). The Histories lesson rubs in the moral. In the ninth year of Hoshea, the son of Elah, Samaria was taken, and the northern kingdom destroyed, because of the sin of Jeroboam and all his successors in forsaking the true worship of God: 'and the Lord testified against Israel and against Judah, even by the hand of all his prophets, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways and keep my commandments ( ) all that I sent to them by the hand of my servants the prophets' (4 Kms 17.13). So 'the Lord removed Israel from his face, as the Lord spoke by the hand of all his servants the prophets' (.23). The Wicked Husbandmen combines the themes of these two passages; but the payment of fruits suggests a further text, 'the song of my beloved concerning my vineyard' (Isa. 5.1-8), which provides the setting for the parable while they provide its action. Isaiah had spoken most famously of Israel as a vineyard not bearing fruit in ch. 5, and Mark begins with the planting of the vineyard, and the making of the hedge, vat and tower (Isa. 5.1 f.). But the plot of the story is in human terms, and the vineyard-owner sent a servant, and another, and another, whose fate is an allegory of the rejection of the prophets of Israel. He wanted to receive of the fruits of the land; but the husbandmen reckoned that if they killed the heir, the inheritance would be theirs. The story has, of course, its climax in a specifically Christian twist: it is God's beloved Son who is killed, provoking the Lord of the vineyard to destroy the husbandmen, and give it to others, the Church. The Marcan church adds the parallel thought from Ps. 118, 'The stone which the builders rejected . . .' When Jesus rode into Jerusalem the people were singing 'Hosanna' from the same psalm: now their rejection of God's 'stone' is seen to have issued in their own destruction. ADAR I

51. Deut. 29.10—30/4 Kms 18—19/Isa. 63/Zech. 14

Mark 12.13-17 (Matt. 21.33-46, Luke 17.20—18.14)

The Tribute Question

For the four Saturdays in Adar, through to the end of the year, the Marcan church provides four stories of questions, three asked of Jesus, one by him. There is some evidence of a rabbinic tradition 1 of four different types of question which were asked of Jewish teachers: a question of wisdom, inquiring after practical guidance 0halakhah); a question of rude mirth (bdruth), deriding the teacher; a question of common morality (derekh 'eretz); and a question of interpretation of Scripture (haggadah). It has been suggested by Dr Daube that the four questions in Mark and the other Synoptics correspond to these: the Tribute Question being concerned with practical guidance, the Resurrection Question being contemptuous, the Great Commandment being about common morality, and the Son of David question being interpretative. Daube makes the further suggestion that the Passover haggadah was represented as being told to four different types of son in the family, the wise, the wicked, the pious, and the son who does not know how to ask. If so, then it might be natural in the weeks before Passover for the Church to take a series of questions that corresponded for a Christian Paschal teaching. The Tribute questioners would form, according to Daube, a rough parallel to the wise son, the Sadducees to the wicked son, the good scribe to the pious son, and Jesus would supply the fourth question himself for the son who could not ask. However this may be, the Questions provide practical guidance for the intending Christian. His attitude to imperial authority is laid down as one of obedience, and Jesus is displayed as a loyal member of the Roman empire without prejudice to his higher allegiance. But further, the question seems to have a particular appropriateness to the first Saturday in Adar, for it was at this time of the year 2 that Israel read the additional lesson, Sh'qalim, Exod. 30.11-16, prescribing the half-shekel which every Israelite had to pay to the Temple. The moral of the Gospel tale is not only that a Christian should pay tribute to Caesar, but also that he should render to God the things that are God's. What is the meaning of this? It is probably that Christians should continue to pay Temple and other dues, as being due to God. In the course of time the Church's relations with Israel became strained, and the continuance of such payments was questioned within the Matthaean church (Matt. 17.24 ff.). Matthew thought the money should still be paid, so as not to offend the Jews. It is very likely that Mark was not so worried, but the presence of 1

2

b Nid. 69b-71a; D. Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (London 1956), pp. 158 ff., 'Four Types of Question'. m Meg. 3.4.

the story as a lesson in the context of sabbath Sh'qaltm seems to imply that it was understood in this way originally. ADAR I I

52. Deut. 31/4 Kms 20—21/Isa. 64/Mal.

1

Mark 12.18-27 (Matt. 22.1-22, Luke 18.15-end) The Resurrection Question Hebrews regarded the resurrection of the dead as being among the 'elementary doctrines' of Christ, so it is fitting for the subject to be treated in the Marcan catechesis. It is possible that the topic is especially in view because of the designation of the second sabbath in Adar as sabbath Zakor, with the additional lesson Deut. 25.17 ff., 'Remember what Amalek did . . . ' The Marcan church is in no way concerned with old Israel's vindictive memories of Amalek; but from the same chapter in Deuteronomy comes the law of Levirate marriage (Deut. 25.5-10), from which the Sadducees had quoted in order to deride the notion of the resurrection of the dead (Mark 12.19, citing Deut. 25.5 f.). Matthew has a Christian version of the Esther story in the parable of the Marriage Feast, as the fulfilment of Purim, the Jewish feast following Zakdr on 14th Adar (22.1-14).1 ADAR

III 53. Deut. 32/4 Kms 22—23/Isa. 65/Mal. 2

Mark 12.28-34 (Matt. 22.23-33, Luke 19.1-38) The Scribe's Question The third sabbath in Adar is Parah in Judaism, with the special reading of Num. 19 on the cleansing of the land. The Histories lesson describes the reforms of Josiah, who cleansed the land in the Histories lesson. Of him it is said, 'There was no king like him before him, who turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul, and with all his strength, according to the law of Moses' (4 Kms 23.25, referring to Deut. 6.5); and his reform was initiated through the activity of Sapphan the scribe (4 Kms 22.3 ff.). On this Saturday the Marcan catechumen is taught the two great commandments by means of the scribe's question. Jesus replied that the first commandment was 'Hear, O Israel . . . you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength', with love of our neighbour as the second; and the scribe commented that to love God with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbour, was more than whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. The burning of the heifer, as in Num. 19, was all very 1

MLM, pp. 415-18.

well; but it is the whole-hearted love of God, as King Josiah displayed it, which constitutes true religion. ADAR

IV 54. Deut. 33—34/4 Kms 24—25/Isa. 66/Mal.

Mark 12.35-7 (Matt. 22.34-46, Luke 19.39—20.18) David's Son The last Saturday in the year is called Hahodesh in Judaism, with its additional reading of Exod. 12.1-20 prescribing that Nisan is to be the first month of the cycle. Of the cyclical readings, the Histories lesson is perhaps the most interesting to the Church, telling of the fall of Jerusalem, and the exile of the house of David; the Former Prophets close with Jehoiachin being released from prison on the 27th Adar in the thirty-seventh year of his exile (4 Kms 25.27). In this way the Deuteronomists posed the dilemma of the Davidic covenant in a form that subsequent generations found hard to resolve. Was the covenant to be fulfilled in an earthly descendant of the royal line, like Zerubbabel, or as envisaged in the Psalms of Solomon? Or was something more apocalyptic to be expected? The Marcan church is critical of the rabbinic orthodoxy which opted for the Messiah's straightforward earthly lineal descent: it took Ps. 110.1 as its text to show that Christ should be the Son of God, rather than of David. So the Marcan Christian is taught the high Christology of Philippians rather than the low Christology of Rom. 1.3 f. and Acts 2.36: in line with the Marcan theology of 1.1. NISAN

I

1.

Gen. 1—6.8/Josh. 1—2/Isa. 1/Hos. 1—2

Mark 12.38-44 (Matt. 23, Luke 20.19—21.4) Widows The opening sidra of the year gives an unhappy example of the murder of the innocent, as Cain kills Abel because his offering is unacceptable to God. The theme is taken up by Isaiah: 'Of what value to me is the abundance of your sacrifices? saith the Lord: I am full of whole burnt offerings of rams; and I delight not in the fat of rams, and the blood of bulls and goats: neither shall ye come with these to appear before me . . . I cannot bear your new moons and your sabbaths, and the great day . . . Wash you, be clean, remove your iniquities from your souls before mine eyes; cease from your iniquities; learn to do well; diligently seek judgement, deliver him that is suffering wrong, plead for the orphan, and obtain justice for the widow . . . Thy princes are rebellious, companions of thieves, loving bribes, seeking after rewards; not pleading for orphans, and not heeding the cause of widows' (Isa. 1.11-23). Did not Jesus similarly attack the hypocrisy of the scribes with their long robes and public saluta-

tions, their chief seats in the synagogues and their long prayers, while at the same time they were devouring the estates of widows? The Marcan catechesis gives two instances of the hypocrisy of official religion in contrast with the affairs of widows: first the scribes, and then the wealthy, whose ostentatious donations are from their superfluity, while the poor widow gives all that she possesses. Pharisaic hypocrisy is a topic congenial to Matthew, who expands the Marcan material (Matt. 23.5-7) into a full discourse; in the peroration of which it is said that upon the heads of the Pharisaic scribes shall come all the innocent blood shed on the earth, from the blood of innocent Abel.1 Luke, who has been including so much additional catechetical matter, now catches up with Mark with the two Widow paragraphs in 20.45—21.4. NISAN

II

Mark

13

2.

Gen. 6.9—11/Josh. 3—4/Isa. 2/Hos. 3—4

=Matt.

24.1-35

=Luke

21.5-38

The Apocalyptic Discourse

There was an expectation among the Jews, going back to the first century, that Messiah would come on Passover night. R. Joshua b. Hananiah is reported to have said, 'In that night they were redeemed and in that night they will be redeemed.'2 In Exod. R. 18.12 it is said, 'On the day when I wrought salvation for you, on that very night know that I will redeem you.' An old Passover poem, 'The Four Nights', gives four events as happening on Nisan 14/15: creation, the covenant with Abraham, the deliverance from Egypt, and the Redemption—Moses and the Messiah will come in this night on the top of a cloud, with the word of the Lord between them. 3 Jerome says, 'It is a tradition of the Jews that the Messiah will come at midnight according to the manner of the time in Egypt when the Passover was (first) celebrated.' 4 There are a number of slightly more general references, such as 'Then the Messiah, who is called "first" (Isa. 41.27) will come in the first month (Nisan), as it is said, "This month shall be unto you the beginning of months".' 5 A later 1 2 3 4

5 6

MLM, pp. 419-30. Mekilta ad Exod. 12.42. The texts following were put together by Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 205 ff. R. Joshua was a second-generation Tannaite, flor. c. A.D. 90. Fragment Targum Exod. 15.18, ed. M. Ginsburger (Berlin 1899), pp. 36 f. Comm. Matt, ad 25.6 (PL 26, col. 192). He continues, 'Whence I think also the apostolic tradition has persisted that on the day of the paschal vigils it is not permitted to dismiss before midnight the people who are expecting the advent of Christ.' Exod. R. 15.1. 'On that night Messiah and Elijah will be made great/will come', Exod. R.18.12; cf. Moore, Judaism, ii, 42.

tradition saw the first step of the redemption as coming at Passover in the form of Elijah.6 The presence of such an expectation in the Church is made explicit in the Epistula Apostolorum, usually dated about 130;1 and I have already argued that it is implicit in the Didache, whose last chapter is a warning to be ready for the Lord's coming.2 It is natural for the three synoptics to structure their readings in the same way. Each Passover is to be marked by a vigil in which the Lord's sufferings will be remembered at the watches. The Church will wait up, hoping that it will be this year that he will come on the clouds for their redemption. On the Saturday before Passover the Church should therefore be warned to be ready. First, the preliminary events can be described—the persecutions of the Church, the setting up of the Abomination, the fall of Jerusalem: as the years drag on between one Gospel's writing and the next, these preliminaries become more clearly ordered and more detailed. Mark itself is written in the shadow of the Jewish Revolt: the setting up of the Abomination is expected to lead straight into the Final Tribulation. Luke replaces this with a more this-worldly description of Jerusalem's being trampled under foot by the Gentiles, and he divides the phases of the preliminary events carefully, with all the wisdom of hindsight. But the purpose and climax of all three Apocalyptic Discourses is the same: it is that the churches may be ready when the Son of Man comes on the clouds in judgement—the reading of Daniel in the first three weeks of the year is loaded with significance, as the Great Tribulation, the Abomination of Desolation, the things that must be, the Coming of the Son of Man, and the ultimate Resurrection become imminent realities. The preliminary events portend the Lord's Coming with the same certainty as the first leaves on the fig tree, appearing in April, portend the summer. Christ is near, at the gates; he said that this generation would not pass away before it all took place, and in Mark's day, forty years on, that generation was near its end—still more in Luke's day, in the late 80s. But of that day or that hour no one knows: it may be Passover this year, or next, or the year or two following; it may be at 9 p.m., or at 12, or at 3. The church must take heed, and watch—watch literally, sitting up through the Paschal vigil, watch figuratively with a life of obedience ready for the End. 1

2

In Ep. Ap. 15 the Twelve are to celebrate Passover fasting, when one of their number will come out of prison; in 16 Christ's own coming is predicted; in 17 the Father's coming, and so Christ's in him, between Pentecost and Passover/ Unleavened Bread in 120 (Coptic)/150 (Ethiopic) years. 15-16 seem to imply an original version of 17 in which the coming of Christ was to have been at Passover. pp. 276 f., above.

Christ is like a householder gone for the day on his business; and we are the watchmen whom he has told to wait up. 'Watch therefore —for you do not know when the master of the house will come, whether late (AT, 9 p.m.), or at midnight, or at cockcrow (3 a.m.), or at dawn (AT)—lest he come suddenly and find you asleep.' What Jesus said to the Twelve, he said to all Christians, Watch. The urgency of the Marcan warning—all too plausible in the late 60s—has, a decade later, become a little strident in Matthew. The wicked servant says in his heart, 'My master is delayed'; as the bridegroom was delayed, the bridesmaids all slumbered; the master returns after a long time to take account of his talents. But to Matthew the delay is but a spur to greater pastoral care. He adds more and more material to the Marcan matrix: a parallel with Noah from the sidra; a parallel with the women grinding at the mill on Passover night (Exod. 11.5); four expanded versions of the Doorkeeper—the Thief, the Two Servants, the Bridesmaids, the Talents; a peroration describing Christ the King on Judgement Day. The division of these units in the numbered sequence in Alexandrinus suggests that Matthew gathered his church-members each evening between the second Saturday in Nisan and Passover; and this is confirmed by the Didachist, who is for the most part dependent on Matthew as his Gospel. The Easter Eucharist (14.1a) is to be preceded by a confession of sins (.lb-2) that the Church's sacrifice may be pure (.2b-3). The church members are to reproach each other not in anger but peacefully (15.3), as they have it in the Gospel (Matt. 5.21-6), with elected bishops of integrity to adjudicate (15.1-2). Their prayers and alms and all their actions they are to do as they have it in our Lord's Gospel (Matt. 6.1-18); Paschal alms and Paschal fasts being especially in view, with Paschal readings from Matt. 24—25 (Did. 16). They are to watch for their lives, for they know not the hour when our Lord comes (Matt. 25.13); their lamps burning and their loins girt (Did. 16.1; Luke 12.35; cf. Matt. 25.1 ff.). 'And', he continues, 'you will assemble frequently' (nuKvfflg 81 ouvax0fi«reo6e) 'seeking what is fitting for your souls ( ) at the last time'. Christians of the Matthaean tradition assembled frequently, each night from the second Saturday in Nisan, to make ready for the Lord's coming. I have commented earlier on the detail of the Lucan version of the Discourse. 1 Suffice it to say that for all the advancing years Luke has not despaired of the Lord's coming, but rather hopes the more. The preliminary signs, rightly understood, have been fulfilled: 'when these things begin to take place, look up and raise your heads, 1 pp. 166 f., 81, above.

because your redemption is drawing near' (21.28). All the Marcan urgency is still there—the fig tree, this generation will not pass away, the ineluctability of Christ's words, the need to watch. As usual, Lucan Christians come to church on Saturday nights only—there is no extension of the Discourse as we find it in Matthew; only a warning against dissipation and drunkenness (Matt. 24.49) lest that day come upon them like a snare; for it will come upon every man on earth. 14TH NISAN

Mark 14.1-11 = Matt. 26. l - l 6

The Anointing at Bethany

The pattern of daily worship in the Matthaean church from Nisan II grew from the Marcan practice of meeting the night before Passover. For Mark opens ch. 14, 'It was now two days before the Passover', and Matthew has Jesus say, 'You know that after two days the Passover is coming' (26.2): on Jewish counting, that is 14th Nisan. The reading marks the beginning of the continuous Passion story in Mark, and constitutes a double preparation for the Christian. For it was at this time that Judas arranged to betray his master to the priests (14.1 f., 10 f.); and it was on this evening, at Simon the Leper's supper, that the woman anointed Jesus—beforehand, as he said, for his burial. So each year, on the evening of 13th/14th Nisan, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she did is told in memory of her. Luke has already told of the woman's anointing in fuller detail at Atonement, and he here omits any reference to Simon's supper. He merely notes that the feast of Unleavened Bread drew near and Judas went to betray Jesus (22.1-6): it would seem as if this should be taken as the introduction to the opening Lucan lection of the following night. PASSOVER

6 p.m. Mark 14.12-21 =Matt. 26.17-25 =Luke 22.1-23 9 p.m. Mark 14.22-31 =Matt. 26.26-35 =Luke 22.24-39 12 Mark 14.32-52= Matt. 26.36-56 =Luke 22.40-53 3 a.m. Mark 14.53-72 = Matt. 26.57-75 =Luke 22.54-65 6 a.m. Mark 15.1-15= Matt. 27.1-26 =Luke 22.66—23.12 9 a.m. Mark 15.16-26= Matt. 27.27-37 =Lvke 23.13-32

The Last Supper The End of the Supper Gethsemane Sanhedrin and Peter's Denial Trial before Pilate Crucifixion

Noon Mark 15.27-33= Matt. 27.38-45 The Cross =Luke 23.33-43 3 p.m. Mark 15.34-41 =Matt. 27.46-56 Jesus' Death =Luke 23.44-9 6 p.m. Mark 15.42-7 = Matt. 27.57-66 The Burial =Luke 23.50-6 It cannot escape the simplest hearer of the Passion story that it is divided into three-hourly units: they are marked almost continuously in the text, and where there are differences between the Gospels—as on the time of the Crucifixion, between John (19.14) and the others, or on the time of the Sanhedrin trial, between Luke (22.66) and the others—the events are still timed to fall on the watches. When we observe that in Egeria's day,1 and in all the earliest lectionaries from both the Jerusalem2 and the Byzantine3 traditions, Maundy Thursday was kept as a vigil of twenty-four hours with the appropriate lessons at each watch, the significance of these notes of time becomes obvious. The Church from the beginning, from the 30s, remembered the Lord's Passion at Passover, with the telling at each watch of the appropriate part of the story. The Gospel was born from the womb of the liturgy. The first explicit reference to such a practice comes in the Didascalia: 'You must thus fast when (the Jews) celebrate Passover, and be zealous to fulfil your vigil in the midst of their Massoth.' 4 All three Gospels open the vigil with a description of Jesus' last Passover. In Mark and Matthew he sends two disciples to prepare for the meal; 'and when it was evening' he comes with the Twelve, and they eat the Pasch; the atmosphere is made pregnant by Jesus' announcement that one of them, one who is eating with him, will betray him. The influence of the seasonal Scriptures is already plain from the beginning. Before Joshua celebrated the first Passover in the land (Josh. 5.10, from the Passover haphfarah), he sent two men before him into the city of Jericho to prepare his way (Josh. 2). Abraham, whose saga begins on Nisan III, Easter Eve, similarly sent his servant before him, and God guided him to a 1

chs. 35—37. The church assembled at 7 p.m. at the Eleona church on the Mount of Olives, moving to the Imbomon, higher up the hill, at midnight; at cockcrow they came down to Gethsemane, and processed to Before the Cross for dawn. There was then an intermission for the fast to be broken, and from 8 a.m. to midday the Cross was venerated; and then a final three hours of readings and hymns from noon till 3 p.m. Egeria indicates which passages were read in most cases. 2 For the old Armenian tradition, see Wilkinson, ET, pp. 267 f.; for the Syriac, see Burkitt, op. cit. 3 Scrivener, op. cit., p. 85. 4 ch. 21.

lodging-place of destiny by his meeting with Rebecca with a water jar upon her shoulder (Gen. 24.10 ff.). God similarly provides Jesus with a lodging-place where he may eat the Passover; he sends two of his disciples, and they are guided by meeting a man with a water-pot. I suggested earlier1 that Book I of the Psalter was likely to have been in use at Paschaltide in first-century Judaism. The Marcan reading shows the first of a long series of echoes from these psalms, which the Church may perhaps have chanted through the vigil.2 Ps. 41.9, 'He who eats my bread lifted up his heel against me', is implicit in Mark, 'one who is eating with me', and is made explicit in John (13.18). The Son of Man is going too as it is written of him in Dan. 7. Luke makes some rearrangement of the whole Passion story, and his 'when the hour came' (22.14, i.e. sundown) leads straight into the eucharistic words. The preliminary cup (.17) belongs at the beginning of the meal, but there is no break in the story till .24, so it seems proper to imagine the Lucan church as remembering Jesus' interpretative words over cup, bread and cup all at 6 p.m. The unit will then close with the prophecy of the betrayal as in Mark and Matthew (.21-3), but placed after the eucharistic words by Luke. The Passover meal was an extended occasion: the lamb should be eaten by midnight,3 and no doubt the Church preserved something like an accurate memory by placing the close of the Supper at the 'late' watch, 9 p.m. This is not said, but Mark begins the eucharistic section, 'And as they were eating . . . ' , and makes it plain that this was the close of the meal by running straight on, 'And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.' The section thus comprises both the eucharistic words and the prophecy of Peter's denial. The Paschal background to Jesus' words at the meal is obvious. Less plain has been the reason for the prominence of the last chapters of Zechariah, but the lectionary theory makes this more intelligible. Each year that the Twelve (Minor Prophets) were taken as the prophetic cycle, the last chapters of Zechariah would be read in Adar, as preparations for Passover were afoot. It would be easy therefore to see these Scriptures as particularly significant for the Lord's Paschal sufferings. Both Mark and Matthew cite here a version of Zech. 13.7, 'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep (of 1

p. 183, above. Our first record of the psalms used in the Maundy Thursday Vigil is in the Armenian lectionary. The Vigil opened with Psalms 2, 3, 4, 41, 42, 43, and closed with Psalms 35, 38, 41, 22, 31, 69, 88, and 102; Wilkinson, ET, pp. 267-9. 5 m Pes, 10.9; Zeb, 5.§, 1

the flock) shall be scattered'. Matthew referred the previous evening (26.15) to Zech. 11.12, with 'They weighed him thirty pieces of silver'. There may be an echo in the eucharistic words of Zech. 9.11, 'And thou by the blood of thy covenant hast sent forth thy prisoners'. Luke extends the conversation at the Last Supper considerably: he adds to the prophecy of Peter's denial the quarrel over greatness in the kingdom and the sayings on the two swords; in this way he is setting out on the path that will lead to John's protracted Farewell Discourses. But his additions are in fact extensions of the 9 p.m. themes of his predecessors. Jesus is one who serves rather than one who reclines (Mark 14.18), and he covenants to the disciples a kingdom as his father did to him, that they should share the Messianic banquet (Matt. 26.29); the swords are to account for their appearance at the arrest (Mark 14.47). The agony at Gethsemane is understood to last three hours. Mark has Jesus bid Peter, James and John pray, and then, finding them sleeping, he says, 'Could you not watch one hour?' (14.37). Something similar is implied at .40, 'And again he came and found them sleeping (); and they did not know what to answer him', and at .41, 'And he came the third time, and said to them, Are you still sleeping? . . . the hour has come'. Matthew has much the same, with Jesus' prayer repeated. The implication is that each time of prayer (and sleep) was an hour, and that the hour which 'has come' is the hour of midnight. Luke, who whitewashes the disciples considerably in this passage, cuts the threefold reproach to one; but he symbolizes the midnight timing of the arrest by the words, 'But this is your hour, and the power of darkness' (22.53). So every Christian is encouraged to keep awake through his Paschal vigil: the apostles slept and deserted the Lord at his hour of need—we will watch, for we know not at what hour our Lord may come. After Ps. 41 comes Ps. 421 with its fifth verse so apt for Jesus' torment in Gethsemane, 'Why art thou very sorrowful, O my soul?': both Mark and Matthew adapt the words to the context, 'My soul is very sorrowful'. The story that is anchored to cockcrow, the fourth watch, is Peter's Denial; for Jesus said Peter would deny him three times before the cock crowed (twice, Mark), and this is now described. So Peter's sleeping brings its nemesis: the Marcan Christian hears the echo, 'Watch . . . whether late, or at midnight, or at cockcrow . . . And what I say to you I say to all: Watch.' There is no suggestion 1

cf. the Armenian Lectionary, n. 73. The Armenian tradition included the interesting practice of taking the psalms in threes, gobala, of which 41, 42, 43 was one. This could account for the trespass into the beginning of Book II of the Psalter.

in Mark or Matthew that the three denials should be set at the hours in the way that Jesus' three reproaches in Gethsemane were; but Luke moves in this direction by writing, 'And after an interval of about an hour still another insisted . . . ' (22.59). In view of its many difficulties,1 it is probable that the Marcan(-Matthaean) Sanhedrin trial is a composition of the early Church. Jesus must have been sentenced by Pilate in the early morning, so if the Jewish authorities were responsible for accusing him they must have met in the night. Such details as Mark supplies seem to have come from the First Book of the Psalter and from Daniel. The false witnesses are in Ps. 27.12, 'For unjust witnesses have risen up against me, and injustice has been false within herself', and in Ps. 35.11, 'Unjust witnesses arose, and asked me of things I knew not.' Ps. 38 is an impressive prophecy of the whole Passion: David's physical agony is described in .1-10; 'my friends and my neighbours drew near before me and stood still; and my nearest stood afar off' (.11) seems to foretell Peter's following afar off; 'they pressed hard upon me that sought my soul: and they that sought my hurt spoke vanities, and devised deceits all the day' (.12) prophesies the unjust trial; 'But I, as a deaf man, heard not; and was as a dumb man not opening his mouth. And I was as a man that hears not, and who has no reproofs in his mouth' (.13 f.) tells the evangelist that Jesus did not reply to his accusers. But Jesus surely will have spoken the truth in the end, witnessing the good confession. Dan. 7, once more, tells us that he will have claimed to be the Son of Man, soon to be given God's full authority, and, to enforce it, is 'coming with the clouds of heaven'. So it is the Passover Writings, Daniel and the First Book of Psalms, which guided the Church to what happened behind the closed doors of the High Priest's palace. The spitting and hitting of Jesus' face come from Isa. 50.6, as foretold in Mark 10.34. Luke, for reasons of his own, has no night trial, but has the Sanhedrin meet at dawn. Dawn finds the Church still gathered and hoping: 'and as soon as it was morning' (15.1) the Jewish leaders brought Jesus to Pilate. You do not know when the master of the house is coming, whether at cockcrow or in the morning. The same Psalm passages supply the chief priests' (false) accusations and Jesus' refusal to reply (Mark 15.4 f.). In Mark the dawn story comprises Pilate's Trial alone. Matthew adds the death of Judas. The destruction of those who have risen against David is mentioned repeatedly in the Psalter (Pss. 31.17; 32.10; 34.21; 35.26; 36.12) and Matthew is able to glean details from various scriptural passages: 2 Sam. 17.23 told him how 1

cf. Nineham, op. cit., pp. 366 ff.

David's leading traitor had hanged himself; the potter and the field of blood come from Jeremiah 18 f. and 32 (LXX 39), as he says, and from Zech. 11.12 f.—the last chapters of Zechariah once again. 1 Luke combines for his dawn recital the Sanhedrin trial and the first hearing before Pilate, with an introduced trial before Herod: 'the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers gathered themselves together, against the Lord and against his Christ' (Ps. 2.2, cited to this context in Acts 4.25-7). Mark and Matthew continue with the soldiers' mockery, the impressing of Simon of Cyrene, and the Crucifixion: Mark says, 'And it was the third hour when they crucified him'—9 a.m. Simon is no doubt a memory of history, but for the rest the evangelists' debt to the First Book of the Psalter, and especially Ps. 22, is obvious. The soldiers' mocking is due to passages like Ps. 38.7, 'My soul is filled with mockings', and to Isa. 50.6 again, with spitting and hitting. Mark and Matthew say, 'And they crucified him, and divided his garments among them, casting lots (for them)', fulfilling Ps. 22.18. Luke has the same words at noon: John cites the text (19.24). Mark only mentions drugged wine, widely known as a charitable provision by the women of Jerusalem: 2 Matthew moves over to the Second Book of the Psalter, Ps. 69, to interpret this as wine mixed with gall. Luke has fallen behind a little, and provides the Condemnation by Pilate, the impressing of Simon, and Jesus' address to the women of Jerusalem (new): he does not mention the crucifixion as taking place at the third hour, and a natural reading of 23.33-44 would seem to place it at the sixth. Perhaps this is the source of John's statement that it was about the sixth hour when Jesus was condemned. For the relation of the address to the women with the Isaiah and Hosea seasonal Scriptures, see above, p, 167. At midday Mark and Matthew record the crucifixion of the two thieves, the mockery of passers-by, of high priests and scribes, and of the thieves; ending, 'And when the sixth hour had come there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour'. The Church will complete its full day's vigil, even if the Lord has not come this year, watch by watch. The dependence upon Ps. 22 as primary source for the details of the Passion is plain. Ps. 22.7 f. runs, 'All that watched me scoffed at me: they spoke with their lips, they shook the head: "He hoped in the Lord; let him deliver him, let him save him, because he desires h i m . " ' In Mark and Matthew the passers-by blaspheme him, shaking their heads—the passers-by come from Lam. 1 2

cf. MLM, pp. 445-7. b Sanh. 43a, citing Prov. 31.6; further references in S-B, i, 1037 f. Prov. 31 was read on the last sabbath in Adar, according to my reconstruction.

2.15, similarly phrased. Mark makes the mockers say, 'Save yourself', 'He saved others; he cannot save himself': Matthew adds, 'He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him.' Luke says that the people stood by watching, but the rulers scoffed at him (23.35). The darkness may well come from the same psalm: 'O my God, I will cry to thee by day, and thou wilt not hear; and by night, and not for folly to me' (22.2). Jesus was dead before evening: if he prayed in his agony by day and by night, then the sun must have been darkened in mid-course. Did not Moses prophesy the same at Passovertide of old? 'Let there be darkness over the land . . . and

there was darkness, very black, a storm over all the land of Egypt three days' (Exod. 10.21 f.). Amos also, but not at Paschaltide, prophesied that the sun would go down at midday (8.9). A further sustained feature of the Marcan account is the threefold subdivision of several of the watches: as there were three reproaches and three denials by Peter, and three attempts by Pilate to release Jesus (15.9, 12, 14), and three scenes at 9 a.m., so are there three groups of mockers now: the passers-by, the high priests and scribes, and the thieves. Matthew has the same. Luke exculpates the people, but retains the triad: the rulers, the soldiers, and the unrepentant thief. With his postponement of the crucifixion, he is able to have three scenes: the crucifying, the mocking, and the repentant thief. At 3 p.m. Jesus dies: 'And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice', expressly in Mark and Matthew, implicitly in Luke (23.44). Mark once more has three elements to the story: Jesus' death, the rending of the Temple veil, and the witness of centurion and women. Matthew expands the second of these, so brief in Mark, with other portents: an earthquake and the resurrection of the saints. Luke has the Marcan triad, but places the veil with the darkness first. The First Book of Psalms extends its influence to the end. In Mark and Matthew Jesus' dying cry quotes Ps. 22.1 in the Semitic, a translation being provided. At .15 the psalmist says, 'My tongue cleaves to my throat', and so suggests the detail from the similar Ps. 69, "They gave me vinegar to drink' (.21); Mark and Matthew supply the context of one running and filling a sponge with vinegar, and giving it him to drink on a reed. Ps. 69 has two references to reproaches in the previous two verses, which have affected Mark's wording at 15.32; but the use of the psalm seems small compared with 22 and 38, and can in both instances be explained as secondary. Luke replaces the offensive, 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?' with a more trustful text, also from the First Book: '(Father,) into thy hands I commit my spirit' (Ps. 31.5). His 'All his acquaintance () stood at a distance' (23.49) is also assimilated to

Ps. 38.11, 'My friends and my neighbours . . . stood at a distance'. The mysterious 'He is calling Elijah . . . Let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down', in Mark and Matthew is perhaps due to the reading cycle also. The coming of Elijah (Mark 9.11, 12, 13) is in fulfilment of Mai. 4.5 ('Elijah does come first to restore all things'); and Mai. 4 was read on the last sabbath in Adar, a fortnight before Passover. So close is the connection between the two that in the traditional cycle observed today the passage is read on the sabbath before Passover, called therefrom Sabbath hag-Gadhdl, the Great Sabbath (Mai. 4.5, 'before the great and terrible day of the Lord comeV The 22nd Psalm follows the opening line (in the Hebrew), "Eli, 'Eli, why hast thou forsaken me?' with an 11th verse, 'affliction is near, for there is no helper'. So the early Church has inserted an ironic multiple misunderstanding of Ps. 22. The bystander misheard "Eli' as Elijah; he did not realize that there was none to help; he did not realize that Elijah had come already to fulfil Mai. 4; he did not realize that he was himself fulfilling Pss. 22.15 and 69.21 with his sponge of wine. Matthew's resurrection of the saints is probably in fulfilment of a further Paschal scripture, Dan. 12.2, 'And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall be raised . . . ' . At sundown the Church ends the vigil: 'and when evening had come . . . ' (Mark 15.42; Matt. 27.57). Though the Lord has not come this year, we need not be sad. We remember his burying now; on Sunday we will remember his bursting of the tomb. When it is evident that the Church looked not to eyewitnesses but to the seasonal Scriptures to find out what happened in the Passion, it seems likely that the same process has been at work with the burial and resurrection stories. For the third Saturday in Nisan, Easter Eve, my reconstruction of the Histories cycle gives the middle part of the book of Joshua; and Josh. 10 provides a striking parallel with the Marcan story. Jesus, as he is in the LXX, defeats the king of Jerusalem and his four confederates in battle: 'and these five kings fled, and hid themselves in the cave in Makeda. And it was told Jesus, saying, The five kings have been found hidden in the cave in Makeda. And Jesus said, Roll stones to the mouth of the cave, and set men to watch over them . . . And Jesus said, Open the cave, and bring out these five kings out of the cave. And they brought out the five kings out of the cave . . . And Jesus slew them, and hanged them on five trees; and they hung upon the trees until evening. And it came to pass toward the setting of the sun, Jesus commanded, and they took them down from the trees, and cast them into the cave where they had fled for refuge, and they rolled stones to the cave, 1

Pearl and Brookes, op. cit., p. 30.

to this day' (Josh. 10.16 ff., 22 f., 26 f.). In the Marcan church, searching to know how the resurrection had taken place, the repeated reading of these verses at Easter year by year could hardly fail to excite attention. Had not Jesus the son of God won his paradoxical victory over the powers by being hanged on the cross? Will his body not have been taken down at evening? Surely, then, it was in a cave that he was buried, with great stones over its mouth: from which, like the kings in v. 22, he came forth alive. The same passage enables Matthew to confute a Jewish slander that the disciples had stolen the body: for here was a prophecy that the Jews would 'set men to watch over them' (.18). Matthew adds the guard from Josh. 10.18. The seal, and the single stone come from Dan. 6.17, 'And a stone was brought and laid upon the mouth of the den, and the king sealed it'. EASTER, NISAN III

3. Gen. 1 2 — 1 7 / J o s h . 7 ff./Isa. 3 — 4 / H o s . 5

Mark 16.1-8 = M a t t . 28.1-20 =Luke 24.1-12

The Resurrection

The growth of the Empty Tomb narratives from the Paschal Scriptures, and other passages associated, is matter for an independent monograph. I have attempted to supply a sketch for this elsewhere,1 and will not repeat it here. My tale is done: I will briefly sum up what I have written. In the Preface I distinguished books that attempt 'proof' from those that aim at plausibility, and it is to this latter class that my own belongs. The claim to be plausible rests upon the cumulative nature of the argument. The O.T. lections were not put together by me to fit Mark; they stand in their own right on the basis of evidence from the O.T., the rabbis, the Samaritans, Philo, Matthew, and Christian lectionaries, and are confirmed by an apparently extended serial use in Luke. The Jewish festivals are not a matter of conjecture at all. Their nature is given in evidence which is mainly pre-Christian, and only at times (e.g. in the reading of Jonah at Atonement) is an inference required from later Jewish tradition. Against this background I have set the Marcan Gospel, as a series of lessons to be read in Church, a hypothesis which I find, apart from the serial element, in the commentaries of the Form-critics. Its opening coincides with the themes of New Year, repentance and the coming of God's kingdom. Soon after New Year comes Atonement, and in Mark 2 1

'The Empty Tomb', Theology, July, 1976; I hope to write a fuller account under the title, 'An Explanation of Jesus' Resurrection*.

are found the stories of Jesus as God's vicegerent forgiving sins on earth, and of his rule on fasting. Soon after Atonement comes Tabernacles, and in Mark 3—4 Jesus gathers men to hear him teach the parables of the Harvest: the Sower, the Light and Measure, the Seed in Secret, the Mustard Seed. It is then nine weeks to Dedication, when the Temple gifts (qorban) were offered, the glory-cloud descended on the Tabernacle, and men from all nations were to come and worship in the Temple: in Mark 7—9 we find the Korban controversy, Jesus' extension of his mission beyond Israel, and the Transfiguration. Three months later comes Passover, and Mark's Passion narrative provides an ideal series of Christian readings for the feast; divided into three-hourly units, just as we find them in use in our first Christian lectionaries. The Resurrection story makes a natural end to the liturgical cycle at Easter. But it is not only that Mark fits the festivals in theme and in balance; it also fits some sabbath readings. In some cases the fit is dramatic: the Leper with Lev. 14 f., 'The Leper'; Jesus' gloss of the Commandments to the Rich Man with their occurrence in Deut. 3.23—7.11; Jairus' daughter with the raising of the widow's son in 3 Kms 17; the Feeding of the Four Thousand with Elisha's feeding in 4 Kms 4; the coincidence of the Elijah material in Mark with the reading of the Elijah saga in 3 Kms. In many cases the sidra was a corpus of various laws and other matter, and there was nothing for it but to select. Selection puts a number of alternatives in the hand of the expositor, but not an infinite number; and the occurrence of the sabbath law at the beginning of Lev. 19 f., for example, or of the sexual flux and touching of the dead in Num. 5, seem to provide impressive texts for the Marcan sabbath controversies, and the fiuxuous woman/Jairus' daughter. In other cases, such as the Gerasene demoniac or the Divorce pericope, the correspondence with the lessons is not very striking; but then we must remember the limitations imposed upon the evangelist by a finite stock of Christian traditions, and the importance of other matters, such as the enrolment of catechumens. The plausibility test requires of a theory only that it provide more than a random correlation; and surely more than a random correlation is in evidence. The possibility of impressive correlations is much increased by the expositor's freedom; but my own freedom has been severely limited. I have not divided Mark into arbitrary halves, nor vacillated between different MS divisions, like Carrington. I do not have three years of readings to choose between, nor two simultaneous points of departure, nor elasticity of readings of up to a month either side, nor variant haphfarah traditions, like Guilding. My festivals and my

O.T. lessons (apart from a small margin in the Histories) are fixed; my Marcan divisions follow the logic of the text, and in number the divisions in Alexandrinus, the mainstream tradition which I followed for Matthew and Luke. I have 'chosen' only the beginning date for Mark. Otherwise my freedom has been limited to the various O.T. cycles, and in practice this has almost always meant the Law and the Histories. Isaiah, the Twelve and the Psalms have a place, but not an essential place: the Lectionary Theory, for all the Synoptics, would stand without them. Elizabeth Bennet declined Mr Collins's proposal, and ultimately married a worthier man with the goodwill of both her parents. It is my hope that the present critical orthodoxy of Source- and Form-criticism may be seen to share some of Mr Collins's weaknesses. Like his offer they are to hand, and promise a certain limited security. But as with him, there are certain fundamental questions with which they have not come to terms; their patrons, like his, are treated (if I may so speak) with an over-supine adulation; and a lifetime's alliance with them is not likely to yield a lasting and satisfying happiness. The Lectionary Theory, like Mr Darcy, has more to offer. It is, like him, in a position to explain more of the facts of the past; it has a transparent convincingness of character (without, I hope, his hauteur); and like him it offers a boundless wealth of possibilities for the future. I trust that it has not been expounded with pride, and that it will not be received with prejudice.

TABLE VIII Folded ( 42x40 cm ) four pictures at the end of pdf

I N D E X OF BIBLICAL P A S S A G E S

OLD TESTAMENT GENESIS 1—6.8 1—3 1—2.3 1.1 2.4 2.24 6.9—11 6.9-9.17 6.1 6.9 f. 6.9 6.13 6.14 8.20-9 8.21 9.4 9.22 10.2 10.9 10.10 11—15.6 11.2 11.26-32 11.30 12—17 12—13 12 12.6 f. 12.8 13.3 13.4-17 14 15—16 15 15.6 15.8 15.9-17 17 17.15-21 17.17 17.19 18—22

36, 215 55 47,116 f. 55 116 236 36, 81, 215 55 36 78 36,55 47 48 32 32 32 32 201 47 201 47 201 36 77 36,48 117 115 117 117 117 117 117 117, 132 201, 203 160 77 201 117 f., 121,203 36 77 49, 77, 144, 160 36, 80 f.

GENESIS (contd.) 18.1—19.30 55 18.1 ff. 77, 80 f. 18.11 77 18.14 78 18.22 36,48 19 107, 121 19.3 81 21 63, 121, 132, 248 21.19 248 21.22 160 22 63, 121 55 22.1-18 22.2, 11 248, 251 23—25.18 36, 48, 77 f. 23 132 24 121,132 24.10 ff. 298 25.1-18 49, 216 36, 48, 78, 179 25.19—28.9 25.19 36 25.22 78 25.26 179 77 26.5 27 132 27.29 49, 216 49 27.41 28.1-9 36,48 36, 78 f., 179 f. 28.10—32.2 28.10 ff. 122 179 28.12 ff. 29—30 121, 133 29.20 178 78, 121 29.32 78 30.13 78 30.23 184 30.24 133 31—33 121 31 36, 79, 178 32.3—36 121 32.3 178 32.22 ff. 79 32.30

GENESIS {contd.) 34 35 35.17 35.19 36.4 ff. 36.33 f. 37—40 37.2 37.11 38 39 f. 41—44.17 41 41.8 41.9 ff. 41.25 ff. 41.38 f. 41.39 41.39 f. 41.40 ff. 41.55 42 44.18—47.27 45.13 47.28—50 49—50 49.9 EXODUS 1.1—6.1 1.1—5.3 1—2 1 3.5 4 6.2—9 10—13.16 10.21 f. 11.5 12 12.1 ff. 12.2 12.3 12.21-63 12.21-36 12.27 12.37 12.48 13.17—17 14 14.21 ff. 15—18

121, 186, 208 121 f. 79 185 187 186 36, 79, 185, 196 36 79 185 f. 196 36,79 192, 194-6, 198 192 192 192 170, 207 79 192 80 80 133 36, 79 f., 207 80 36, 80, 207 133 133 36, 82 55 134 217 116 217 36 36 302 295 58 43 f., 292 19, 22, 243 44, 116 63 59 276 59, 265 92, 116 36 59, 136 116 31

EXODUS (contd.) 59, 134 15.1-21 165 15.1 f. 15.17 f. 124 59 15.22-6 60 15.22 59 16 16.1-30 217 59 16.1 59 16.12 ff. 59 16.22 ff. 59 17.1-7 43,62 17.8-16 36 18—20 59 18—19.5 58, 122 18 59 19 ff. 19—20.23 63, 193, 212, 218 59 19.1 ff. 194 19.5-8 193, 195, 198 20.2 f. 20.23, 25 193 36 21—24 218 21.24 21,27 23.10-19 29 23.12 21, 27, 258 23.16 256 23.17 246 f. 23.20 29,280 24 194 24.3-8 24 24.16 24,60 24.18 45,64 27.20—30.10 135 28 64 30.11—34.35 30.11-16 39,45,, 58, 62, 64 f.. 106, 136, 290 29,59 32 119 32, 4, 9, 12 f. 29 32.25 ff. 59 f. 34 21,27 34.18-26 21, 258 34.22 256 34.23 45 35 135 40 23 40.1, 17 LEVITICUS 1—7 1—6.8 2.10

250 180 66

LEVITICUS (contd.) 9—11 37, 88, 247 f. 9 31,250 31 10 88 10.1-5 249 10.10 11—15 31, 33 11 247,249 244 11.22 37, 164, 249, 254 12—13 12 249 113, 249 f. 13 37, 164, 250, 254 14-15 14 89, 113,250 250 14.2, 4-32 249 15 32, 34, 35, 37 16—18 31-4, 44, 63, 85, 164, 247, 16 250-4 16.8, 10 247 247,249 16.16 17—18 164 17 31, 128 17.1-9 32 17.6 32 247 17.7 32 17.10-16 17.11 32 18 31-3, 44, 63, 85 f. 18.7 32 18.24-30 32 19—20 31, 34 f., 37, 164, 254 f. 88, 254 19.1 f. 19.18 88, 96, 254 19.23 ff. 34 21—24 33-5, 37, 164, 256 21—22 31 22.26—23.44 33 f., 63, 256 22.26-33 33 23 23, 31, 33 f„ 44, 257 23.1 ff. 23, 63 23.4-44 21 23.10 27 23.15 ff. 185 23.22 186 23.23 24 23.23-5 25, 63, 248 23.24 25, 44, 162, 245 23.26-32 32 23.32 164 23.33-44 33, 256 23.39 258 23.40-2 25

LEVITICUS (contd.) 24 24.8 24.10-23 25.1—26.2 25 25.1-7 25.1 25.8 ff. 26 26.2—27 26.3-46 26.6 26.34 ff. 27 NUMBERS 1—4.20 1 1.1 1.4-16 1.4 2.3 4.21—7.89 5.1 ff. 6.1-21 6.6-12 6.22 6.24-6 7 7.1-83 7.3, 10, etc. 8—12 8.1-4 9.1 9.6 ff. 10 10.33-6 11 12 13—15 13 13.2 13.3 13.17 14 14.6-11 16—18 19 20.12 26 27.17 28—29

89,257 274 257 35, 38, 262 201 34 257 34 34, 46, 129 35, 38, 262 62 263 f. 34 34

264 257 23 264 257 186 89, 265 89, 265 f. 142 266 58 107 176 f., 270 f. 23 271 29,266 176 f„ 270 f. 23 89,266 58 125 90, 95, 125, 267, 269 125, 267 37, 89, 267 58 267 268 256 129 267 37 180, 291 122 264 270 21,23

NUMBERS (contd.) 28 28.1-15 28.9 f. 28.11-16

28.11 f. 29.1-16 29.1-6 29.1 29.17

58-60 45, 106 29 62

ff.

29 63 25 24, 162 63

DEUTERONOMY 31, 35, 114, 123 1—4 1—3.22 95, 283 95, 283 1.1 93, 122 1.6 ff. 1.9, 19, 26 93 122 1.37 36 3.18 3.23—7.11 96, 283 36,96 3.23 93 4.9 35 5—11 96, 276, 283 f. 5.6-21 97 5.11 f. 29 5.12-15 207 5.15 93 6.2 6.4—7.10 55 6.4 f. 92, 96, 276, 284, 291 97 6.16, 18, 24 121 7.3 7.10 f. 55 55 7.11—8.1 97 7.12—11.25 97 7.12—9.5 36 7.12 8.11—9.10 55 8.11-14 98 8.15 95 9—10 123, 285 97 9.1 97 9.6—10.11 9.7 f. 25 9.11-24 55 9.22 25, 123 60 9.25 55 10.1-15 125 10.3 97 10.12, 18 ff. 10.16 118 122 11.6 11.10-25 55

DEUTERONOMY (contd.) 55 11.25 11.26—16.17 97 11.26-8 93, 98 36,94 11.26 11.30 117 12—26 35,42 12 98,209 12.20 98 13 98 13.4 98 14.28 98 15 98 15.1-11 114, 161 15.7 ff. 161 16.1-17 21,99 27 16.1-8 98 16.3 ff. 16.13 258 99 16.18—21.9 16.18 36 99 16.21—18.14 17.14-20 99, 209, 287 99 18.1-8 20.1-9 99 100 20.10 ff. 21.10—25.19 43, 99, 209 36 21.10 21.15-17 99, 209 f. 21.18-21 99, 210 99 22.1-4 99 22.8 100 22.13 f. 161, 287 23.1 ff. 122, 186 23.3 f. 100 23.9 ff. 100 23.19 100,283 24.1 f. 24.8 f. 100 122 f. 24.9 100 24.14 ff. 24.17 101, 209 25.5-10 291 25.17-19 42 f., 62, 291 100 26—29.9 100, 115 26.1-15 289 26.1-11 27 26.5-9 27—33 36 93 27—28 27 27 28 39, 46, 125, 213, 289 28.1 ff. 100

DEUTERONOMY (contd.) 28.2 28.15, 33 28.49 29.10-30 29.10 f. 29.10 29.11 29.14 f. 29.18-23 29.27 30 39, 101, 119, 30.1 ff. 30.15-19 31—34 31 31.2 ff. 31.9 ff. 31.10 f. 31.10 31.29 32 38, 32.9 f. 32.11, 15 32.21 32.35 32.42 32.43 33—34 33.2 34 JOSHUA 1

1.1 2

2.22

3—4 3.2 3.5—4.1 3.14-17 4.19 5.2—6.1 5.2-9 5.10 f. 5.13—6.1 5.15 7 7.6 ff. 7.8 8.1 ff., 30 ff. 9.1 f.

25 25 101 38, 101 93 36 161 93 101 25 125, 161 25, 210 93 114 38, 101 101 20 26 34 93 101, 125 25 161 162 101, 161 161 101 38 161 36

114 f. 116 117, 153, 297 116 115 f. 116 115 116 115 115 92, 115 f., 118 115 f„ 130, 297 115 116 202 f.

201

117 f. 117 f. 117 f.

JOSHUA (contd.) 10 117 f„ 153, 303 f. 10.16-27 303 f. 10.18 304 11 f. 117 f. 13—22 118 23.12 f. 121 24 115 24.2 ff. 27,34 24.25 f. 27 24.26 117 JUDGES 1 f. 2 4 f. 5.24 6—9 6 6.12 8 f. 9.27 10—12 11 11.35 f., 39 13—16 13.4 13.5 13.7, 14 13.24 f. 17—21 19 19.1 f. 19.15 RUTH 1.1

1.12 f.

2.1

4.11 ff. 4.12 4.17b-22 4.18

121, 130 114 122, 130 142 130 121, 141 142 121 34 130 121, 142 142 121, 130 141 f. 217, 261 141 f. 143 130, 143 107, 121 185 143 184 f. 185 184 184 185 184 ff. 184

1 SAMUEL/1 KINGDOMS 1—3 123, 130, 184 f. 1—2

1.1 1.5 f. 1.11 1.18 1.20

121, 188

188 188 121, 142 188 21

1 SAMUEL/1 KINGDOMS (contd.) 142 f„ 187 f„ 203 2.1-10 196 2.3 143 2.21, 26 185 2.27-36 185 3.11-14 123, 130 4—6 185 4.11-18 193 f., 198 5 123 7—9 114 8 123 10—12 144 10.1, 6, 10 136 10.17 134 f. 11.1-4, 9-11 123 13—15 136 13.15 ff. 136 14.6 134, 136 14.13 ff. 136 14.22, 24 42 15 144 15.23, 26 123 16—18 145 16.13, 23 134 17 136 17.51 134 18 145 21 136 21.9 135 22 186 22.3 f. 135 22.11-19 135 23.29 135 24 109 25—28 135 28.5 123, 135 31 135 31.3 2 SAMUEL/2 KINGDOMS 21 1.11 135 1.19 ff. 135 2.4 136 2.12 ff. 136 3.12 ff. 136 4.7 ff. 135 f. 5.4-9 124, 129 6-7 136 8 150 8.4 ff. 136 10.1 ff. 107 11 136 13 ff.

2 SAMUEL/2 KINGDOMS (contd.) 107 13 107 16.21 300 f. 17.23 136 18.18 135 23.9 f., 13 1 KINGS/3 KINGDOMS 254 3—4 205 3.9 ff. 136 4 ff. 256 4.29 ff. 205 4.32 136 4.34 114,256 8 22,24 8.2 130 8.2-21 130 8.22 ff. 130 8.54-66 24 8.65 f. 136, 254 10 205 10.3 145, 266 14 87 f„ 123, 145, 266 f., 17 269, 272, 278 149 17.4 123, 266, 278 18 274 18.4 149 18.44 130 18.46—19.21 123, 268, 278 19 269 19.1 f. 270 19.11 143 19.20 f. 123 20 21 20.22, 26 123, 268 f., 278 21 22, 123, 269, 273, 278 22 269, 278 22.17 2 KINGS/4 KINGDOMS 147 1—3 147 1.10 147, 270, 279 2 270, 272 3—4 147, 284 4-6.23 147 f. 4.1-7 266, 272, 278 4.8-37 4.23 29 4.42-4 145, 269, 272-5, 278 151 5.14 148 6.1-23 148 f. 6.24—8.29

2 KINGS 4 KINGDOMS (contd.) 9—10 149 11 f. 149 f. 12 36, 106, 151 12.4 106 12.10 151 13 f. 150 13.7 150 14.25 175 15.17 151 17 31, 114, 288 f. 289 17.13, 23 164 18 f. 22 f. 152 22.3 ff. 291 22.11 ff. 5 23.25 291 23.34 152 24 f. 153 24.18—25.30 160 25.1 24, 153 22 25.8 200 25.13 ff. 24 25.25 25.27 292 1 CHRONICLES 2.4, 10-12 15 f. 20.1 23.31 28 29

186 124 21 29 252 45

2 CHRONICLES 2.4 15.8-16 23.6, 14, 19 24.18-21 28.15 31.5 f. 33.12 f.

29 194 150 150 148 151 151

EZRA 1 1.1 1.6 1.7 f. 3.2, 4 3.4 ff. 3.8 5.2 6.19 ff. 8.2

203 201 45 201 201 200 201 201 39,200 200

EZRA (contd.) 9 9.5 9.7 10.1 NEHEMIAH 1.1

7.73—8.2 8.1-15 8.7 8.8

8.9-12 8.13-18 8.14 f.

8.16-18

201-3

201 202 202 201 25

200 200

110 24 f. 126 25

200

8.18 9 9.1 9.6-38 10.2, 6, 23 10.33

35 27, 201 199 f.

ESTHER

42, 183

JOB 1—2 1.5 1.21 2.8, 11 ff. 3 3.10 4—21 4—7 7.2 ff. 7.11 7.12 f. 9.13 10.1 24.25 25—26 26.10 27 28—41 38.1 f. 38.2-6, 15 38.25, 35 42.7-9, 10-12 42.17bc PSALMS 1 2 2.2

200 200 29

190 21, 187 187 188 190 188 189 190 190 188 190 117 188 190 189 f. 117 189 f., 261 f. 189 f. 190 188 188 188 186 212 22, 163 301

PSALMS (contd.) 251 2.7 21 19.6 301-3 22 303 22.1 301 f. 22.7 f. 303 22.11 197 22.13 302 22.15 301 22.18 197 22.21 300 27.12 302 31.5 300 31.17 300 32.10 300 34.21 300 35.11,26 300 36.12 300, 302 38 301 38.7 303 38.11 298 f. 41.9 299 42 22, 163 46 47 163 22, 163 48 197 57.4 301 f. 69 302 f. 69.21 263 73—83 27 77.11 ff. 27 78 261 78.2 27, 198 80 23, 26 f„ 263 81.3 ff. 263 82 27, 263 83 117,263 89.9 f. 248 91.11 ff. 163 93—99 27 95 27 99 117 101.6 27 103 263 104.5 ff. 105 27, 116, 123 f., 263 27, 122-4 106 263 107.23-30 116 114 292 110.1 289 118.22 f. 118.17 27 27 118.27

PSALMS (contd.) 119 132 137

189, 196-8, 212 123 f. 29, 153

PROVERBS 1—9 1.1 1.6 2.4 3.14 8 10-31 17.3 21.4 25.6 f. 28.25 31.6 31.10-31

205 205, 259 205, 261 261 261 205 205 193 117 206,209 117 301 205

ECCLESIASTES 1.1

184

SONG OF SONGS 1—8 ISAIAH 1—12 1 1.1-27 1.7, 9 f. 1.11-23 1.13 f. 2.10-19 3.9, 13 f. 3.16—4.1 4.3 4.5 5.1-8 6 6.5, 7, 11 6.9 f. 7 7.9 7.14 8 8.1-3 8.3 8.8 8.14 f. 8.15 8.16 8.17

183 f., 203

159 f. 164 110 160 166, 292 29 166 f. 160 167 168 203 203, 289 167, 169, 203 202 259 160, 169, 203, 216 160 160, 168, 216 196, 202 f. 168 f. 196 202 168 202 111,202 202

ISAIAH (contd.) 168 8.18 202 8.23 160, 168 9 169, 203, 217 99.1 f. 169 9.6 f. 194, 198 10.15-19 195 10.15 202 10.23 165, 196 10.32—12.6 195 10.33—11.1 160, 170 11 165 12.2, 5 196, 198 13.1, 17-19 159, 162 13.23 196 14 162 19 f. 159 f., 162 24—35 160, 163 24—27 167 24.17 159, 163 28—32 231 29.14 163 33 f. 175, 246 f. 34 f. 246 f. 34.8, 14 164 f. 35—40 35 160, 163 f., 171, 213, 218, 246 f., 251 163 35.1, 2, 4 85, 88, 170 f., 247, 35.5 f. 272, 275, 278 163 35.8, 10 159, 164 36—39 164 36 f. 152, 164, 178 38 38.9-20 164 164 39 163 f., 171 40 110 40.1-26 40.3 f. 161 40.3 163, 171, 246, 261 163, 171 40.5 163, 171, 246 40.9 f. 40.12—41.7 163 260 40.18 163 41.8—42.9 41.17-22 119 41.27 293 42.1-4 251 f. 116 42.5-9 264 42.6 f., 11 f. 42.18 259 116 43.1 f., 15-19

ISAIAH (contd.) 43.19 f. 264 44.24-7 116 45.16 173 46.7-13 119 119,161 48.3-5 48.9,19 119 48.21 161 49.14—51.4 109 50 110 50.6 285, 300 f. 50.7 192 51.9 f. 116 51.10 f. 161 51.12—52.13 109 51.17 ff. 285 52.3 285 52.4 f. 169 f. 161 52.12 52.13 ff. 285 53.4 218 172, 284 f. 53.12 54.6-8 286 54.11—55.6 109, 157, 174 172 f. 55 172, 174 55.2 286 55.3, 6 f. 55.6—56.8 110 186 56.1-8 287 56.3 56.7 161, 287 57.14—58.14 110, 178 161, 173 58 173 58.6 f. 109, 173 60 161, 173 61 f. 61 3 f., 6, 14, 82, 106, 171 f. 172 61.5 171 f. 61.6-8 286 62.11 161, 209 63.4-9 161 65 29 66.23 JEREMIAH 1—2.3 2.4-28 6.15 10.15 18 f. 25.11 f. 29.22 31.15

110 110 153 153 301 201 193 50, 216 f., 261

JEREMIAH (contd.) 32 36 36.22 40.4 40.10 41.1 f. 41.8 46-51 52

301 111 22 153 22 24 22,24 159 160

LAMENTATIONS 2.7,9 3.15 4.17, 19 f.

184 301 f. 184

EZEKIEL 1—3.15 1 1.26 8—11 9 16 17.23 20 20.12, 21 22.26 23.38 24 26—28 29.1-16 29.17 ff. 30.20 ff. 31 31.1 31.6 32 33.21 ff. 40—48 40.1 45.18 46.1-5, 6 ff. DANIEL 1—2.4a 1 1.1 f. 1.2, 3, 7 1.8 ff. 2—7 2 2.1 2.2, 3-9

28 f. 107, 201 29 28 f. 29 107 260 28 29 29 29 28 28 28 28, 112 28, 112 28, 194, 260 194 260 28 28 28 112 23 29 191 200 f., 203 191 201 191 191, 200, 203 193, 198 f. 191 192

DANIEL (contd.) 2.4a 191, 203 2.10 f. 192 2.14 ff. 192 2.19 f. 191 2.26 201 2.27 ff. 192 2.28 203 2.34 193 2.35 198 2.39 191 2.40 192 2.45 193 2.48 f. 192 3 193, 198 f., 207 3.25 192 4 193 f., 198 f., 201, 260 4.5 191, 194 4.6 ff. 194 4.12 260 4.13 f. 192 4.19 191 4.21 260 4.35 195 5 195, 198-200 5.2 191, 200 5.12 201 5.17 191 6 196-8 6.3,7 196 6.17 304 6.22 192 6.28 191 7 191, 197-201, 203, 216, 298, 300 7.1 191, 201 7.5 f. 191 7.7 f. 192 7.13 f. 203 7.15 191 7.16 192 7.21, 23 ff. 192 7.28 191 8—12 191 8 200-3 8.1 191 8.2 201 8.5 192 8.6-8 201 8.8-12 192 8.9 202 8.10 f. 192 8.12-14,16 * 192

DANIEL (contd.) 191 8.17 f. 191, 201 8.18 192 8.20 201 8.21, 23, 26 191 8.27 200-3 9 201 9.2 191 9.3 202 9.7 f. 202 9.20 191 f„ 201,204 9.21 201 9.24 ff. 204 9.25 202 9.26 192,202 9.27 191, 199 f., 202 f. 10—12 191 10.1 ff. 199, 203 10.2 f. 132, 199, 203 10.4 201 10.6 191 10.8 f. 201 10.9 199 10.12 f. 192 10.13 191,204 10.15 202 10.16 192 10.20 f. 203 11.1-20 192 11.2-39 192 11.3 202 11.10, 16, 19 202 11.22, 26 192 11.31 202 11.33-5 202 11.40 f. 204 12.1 ff. 203 12.1 303 12.2 202 12.4 192 12.5 ff. 204 12.6 f. 202 12.9 192 12.11 202 12.12 HOSEA 1.1 2.11 ff. 6.2 6.6 10.8 11.1

175 29 180 85 167 216, 261

HOSEA (contd.) 11.7—12.12 12.3 f„ 12 12.12—14.9 13 13.2 f. 13.6 ff., 11 JOEL 1—2 2.10 2.15 f. 2.15-27 2.18-27 2.30 ff. 3—4 3.13 3.16 AMOS 1.1 f. 1.11 f. 8.5 8.9 OBADIAH JONAH 1—2 1.4 1.5 f., 16 3—4 3.5-9 MICAH 6.7-9 7.18-20 NAHUM HABAKKUK 3 HAGGAI 2 2.1 ZECHARIAH 1.6 1.7 1.21 2.12 3—4.7

158, 179, 216 179 108, 179 197 f., 216 197 f. 197 178 175 245, 252 f. 176 178 175,178 177 260 175 175 175 29 302 158, 174-6 178 264 263 178, 253 178 180 176 174,176 177 180 24, 112 25 24 25 25 176 f., 270 f., 280

ZECHARIAH (contd.) 3.1 ff. 5.3 6.15 7.1 7.3 ff. 7.5 7.14 8.14 8.18 f. 8.19 9.9

280 25 25 24 22, 24, 184 214 25 25 184 22,24 286 f.

ZECHARIAH (contd.) 9.11 11.12 f. 13.7 14 14.9 14.16 MALACHI 3—4 3.1 4.5 f.

299 299, 301 298 177, 256 245 256 177 247 177, 280, 303

APOCRYPHA TOBIT 1—14

132 f., 142

WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3.6 ECCLESIASTICUS Prologue 1 1.17-19, 22 2 2.5 3.6-9 4 9.10 23 f. 31.3 ff. 32.1 f. 33.19-23 33.24 ff. 35.12-20 38.1-23 38.24—39.11 41—42.8 42.15—43.33 44—50 50.26 51.23-30

52, 106 206 f. 207 207 193 207 207 211 208 209 209 209 f. 211 152, 173, 210 208 208 208 208 208 208 206

PRAYER OF MANASSEH 4, 8 1 MACCABEES 2.1

193

151 144

1 MACCABEES (contd.) 2.26 133 2.69 133, 137 3.4 133, 137 3.12, 16, 18 133, 137 3.18, 24 f., 46 134, 137 4.6, 9, 17 134 4.24, 30, 32 134 4.52 26 5.2,6 134 5.10 ff., 24-7 134 5.33 135 6.43 135 7.33 f. 135 9.6 f., 11 135 9.18 f., 20 135 9.30, 58 ff. 135 10.7 ff., 21 135 10.25, 39-44 136 10.71 ff. 136 11.9 f., 17 136 11.20-52 136 11.58,60-2 136 12.1 f. 136 13.11, 27 f. 136 14.4-15 136 15.32 136 16.2 137 16.14 26 16.16 137 2 MACCABEES 1—2 2.7,18 3—7

270 271 133

NEW TESTAMENT MATTHEW 1.3,5 1.21 2.1-12 2.13-23 2.15 2.18 2.23 3—4.17 3.1 3.3 3.11 3.14 f. 3.17 4.1-11 4.13 4.15 f. 4.17-25 4.24 f. 5—7 5 5.11 5.17-48 5.21-6 5.29 ff. 5.31 f. 5.37, 39, 40 5.43 5.44-8 5.44 6.1-18 6.12 6.31-3 7 7.12 7.13 f. 7.17 ff. 8—9 8.1-13 8.5-13 8.17 8.21 9.9-17 9.13 9.36—10.10 10 f. 10

185 49 49 50 216 216 f. 142, 217 217 50 261 79 217 251 217 82 217 218 88 88, 189 f., 212 ff., 218, 227-9, 239 85 227 227 295 228 f. 228 f. 228 f. 88 88 228 f. 295 228 f. 228 f. 85 228 f. 93 195 87, 214 88 88 218 143 214 85 230 f. 230 213 f.

MATTHEW (contd.) 10.16 230 10.40 230 11 85, 213 f., 245, 247, 250 11.2 85,247 11.5 85, 251 11.7-19 85 11.18 141 11.20-4 85 11.25-7 230 ff. 11.27 231 f. 213 12 12.1-8 249 f. 250 12.7 12.9-21 250 12.18-21 251 f. 12.22-37 252 f. 253 12.36 f. 252 ff. 12.38-45 262 12.42 12.46-50 254, 256 13 86, 145, 213 f., 231, 256, 260 ff. 261 13.14 13.44 ff. 261 13.54 262 268 15.22-8 16.13 ff. 232, 235 232, 235 16.17 f. 213 f. 17 f. 233 17.2 233 17.20 233 17.24—18.10 17.24-7 236,290 233 17.25 236 18.3 f., 6-20 233 18.12-20 18.15-17, 20 233 233, 236 18.21-35 233, 236 19.1-9 11 19.8 285 f. 21.1-13 214, 291 22.1-14 23 49, 213 f., 237,, 239, 292 f. 237 23.3 293 23.5 ff. 237 23.16 237 f. 23.31-6 24 f. 49, 213 f., 238 f., 277, 293 ff.

MATTHEW (contd.) 24.30 24.37 ff. 24.42 f. 24.48 ff. 24.49 25.1-13 25.13 25.34 26.1-16 26.2 26.15 26.28 26.29 27.3-10 27.52 f. 27.57 27.66 28.19 MARK 1.1-20 1.1-8 1.1 1.2 1.3-5 1.4 1.6 1.9-20 1.11 1.12 f. 1.16-20 1.21-34 1.21 1.29 1.32 1.35-45 1.35-9 1.37 f. 1.40 1.44 f. 2—3.6 2.1-12 2.13-22 2.23—3.6 2.23-8 2.23 3.7—4.34 3.7-19a 3.7-12 3.7 f. 3.9 3.13-19

238 49, 91, 215 238 238 f. 296 238 f. 295 261 296 296 299 86 299 300 f. 303 303 304 91

245-8 248 2,292 246,261 246 246, 269 269 248 248,251 247,264 248 248-50 247, 251 249 250 250 f. 251 251 250 251 241, 255 252 252 f. 254 f. 250 255 256, 264, 267, 278 88, 256 f. 88, 251 256 259 257, 264

MARK (contd.) 3.19 3.19b-30 3.19b-20 3.23 3.28-30 3.31—4.25 3.31-5 3.31 f. 3.35 4 4.1-34 4.1-9 4.2 4.10-20 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.21-5 4.22 4.26-9 4.29 4.30-4 4.33 4.34 4.35-41 4.41 5.1-20 5.5 5.21-34 5.35-43 6.1-6a 6.6b-13 6.14-29 6.15 6.30-44 6.34 6.37 6.41 6.44 6.45—8.26 6.45-55 6.48, 52 7.1-23 7.3 f. 7.23 7.24-30 7.24 7.31-7 8.1-10 8.6 8.11-26 8.17-21

83,88 89, 256 ff. 258 259 257 89 256, 258 259 258 145 258 256, 258 f. 261 256, 259 259 259, 261 261 256, 259 f. 261 256, 260 260 256,260 261 260 f. 262 f. 263 264 f. 265 265 f. 266 f., 278 261, 267, 278 89, 231, 268, 278 268 f., 278 269 269, 273 f., 278 269 273 274 84 11,84,89 270 270 270 f., 278 242 11 270, 272, 278 251 270, 272 270, 272-4 274 270, 275, 278 278

MARK (contd.) 8.27-9.40 8.27—9.1 8.27 8.31-3 8.33 8.34—9.1 9.2-13 9.11 f. 9.13 9.14-29 9.23 9.30-50 9.30-2 9.30 9.33-50 9.38-41 9.43-9 9.50 10.1-16 10.1-12 10.1 10.13-16 10.17-31 10.32 ff. 10.34-45 10.34 10.45 10.46-52 10.52 11.1-11

11.12-25 11.20 11.22 11.27—12.12 12.1-9 12.10 12.13-17 12.18-27 12.28-34 12.35-7 12.38-44 13 13.14 13.17 13.35-7 14.1-11 14.3-9 14.18 14.12-21 14.22-31 14.22 14.32-52

84 270, 278 275 278, 284 280 278-280 270, 278, 280 303 269, 303 270, 278, 280 f. 281 281 f. 278, 284 280 278 281 281 236, 281 283 278 283 278 278, 283 278, 284 278, 284 285,300 285 286 247, 278 286 f. 287 f. 287 278 288 f. 287 235 289 f. 278, 291 291 292 292 f. 278, 293-5 3 167 295 296 86 299 296-8 296, 298 f. 274 296, 299

MARK (contd.) 14.47 14.53-72 15.1-15 15.9, 12, 14 15.16-26 15.27-33 15.32 15.3441 15.42-7 15.42 16.1-8 LUKE 1—3 1.1-4 1.4 1.5-25 1.6 1.7 1.9 ff. 1.11 1.13 1.15 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.23 f. 1.25 1.26-56 1.28 f. 1.31 1.32 f. 1.33 1.34 1.35 1.37 1.38 f. 1.41 1.42 1.44 1.46-55 1.48 1.54 f. 1.56 1.57-80 1.63 1.68-79 1.78 f. 1.80 2.1-40 2.4 2.7

299 296, 299 f. 296, 300 f. 302 296, 301 297, 301 f. 302 297, 302 f. 297, 303 f. 242 304 81 8-14 2,92 75, 141 f., 170, 204 77 f. 77 167, 169 f. 77 77, 142 142 77 142 13 74 74,78 75, 142, 170 142 168 161 78 142 168 78 142 78 142 78 74 78, 142 78 74 75, 143, 170 168-170 74 97, 169 74, 143 75, 143, 170 169 79

LUKE (contd.) 2.19 2.26 2.29-32 2.30 2.31 f. 2.32 2.34 f. 2.39 2.40 2.41-52 2.51 2.52 3.1-20 3.2 3.9 3.16 3.21-38 3.22, 29 f. 4.1-13 4.1 4.4,7 4.14-30 4.14 4.16-30 4.17 4.18 4.21 4.22 4.26 f. 4.29 f. 4.31—6.19 4.31-7 4.39 5.39 6.19 6.20-50 6.48 7.1-10 7.1 7.11-17 7.11 7.18—8.21 7.18-35 7.21 7.22 7.28-35 7.33 7.36-50 8.1-21 8.1-3 8.1 8.4-18

79 167 74 79, 167 169 97 74, 168 74 74, 143 75, 143 79 74, 143 79, 143, 170 143 195 79 80 80 80, 144 144 80 82, 144 144 9, 14 4-6, 106, 158 f. 144 13 80 151 145 83 145 249 211 83 88 219 11, 87 f. 13 87 f. 9 87 85, 245, 249 f. 87, 171 170 f., 251 168 141 8, 86, 252, 254 262, 264 87, 262 8 f. 86

LUKE (contd.) 8.4 83 87, 262 8.15 8.16-18 262 8.19-21 86 f., 262 8.22-6 262-4 8.23 f. 264 8.26-39 264 8.29 265 8.40-8 89, 265 f. 8.49-56 89, 145, 266 f. 9.1-9 89, 145, 267 f. 9.8 268 9.10-17 90, 145 f. 9.17 84 9.18-50 84 9.28-36 90 13 9.31 9.37 9 9.43b-50 282 9.51—18.14 84 9.51-62 95, 147, 282 f. 9.51 10, 13, 90, 95, 147, 172 96 9.52 147 9.54 9.61 f. 147 10.1-16 95 10.1 96 147, 219 10.4, 7 10.8 219 10 10.13 10.17-24 95 10.20 219 10.21 95 f„ 98, 219 10.25-37 96, 148, 284 10.38-42 96 96, 219 10.39-41 96 11.1-13 96 11.1, 5 11.7 148 96 11.9 97 11.14-28 11.17 148 97 11.20 148 f. 11.21 f. 97, 172, 284 11.22 97 11.24-6 97 11.27 f. 97 11.29-36 97 11.33 97 11.37-54 97, 106 11.42 97 11.45

LUKE (contd.) 12.1-12 12.3, 5 12.13-40 12.13 ff. 12.19 12.24 12.33, 35-40 12.41—13.9 12.42 12.47 ff. 12.49 ff. 12.54 12.56 f. 12.58 f. 13.1-9 13.6-9 13.10-21 13.16 13.17 13.18-21 13.22-35 13.24 f. 13.26-30 13.31-5 13.32 f. 13.34 f. 14.1-24 14.7-11 14.12-14 14.15, 18-20 14.25-35 14.26 14.28 ff. 14.31 f. 14.34 f. 15 15.1-7 15.1 f. 15.11-32 16.1-13 16.9 16.14—17.4 16.16-18 16.16 16.17 16.19-31 16.29, 31 17.1-4 17.1 f. 17.5-10 17.11-19 17.14

98 98 98, 172 219 98, 172, 209 149 98 98 219 219 98 98, 149 219 98 99, 149 98 99 173 99, 173 262 99 149 f. 99 99 99 10, 150 99, 173 99, 206,209 99 99 100 100, 219 100, 151 100, 150 100 100 100 100 100, 173,210 100, 173 100 100, 171 f. 100 12 88 100, 171 f. 14 100 100 100, 171 f., 211 100, 151 100

LUKE (contd.) 17.20-37 17.22 17.28 ff. 18.1-8 18.7 18.9-14 18.15-17 18.18-34 18.35-43 19.12-27 19.12 19.14, 27 19.41-4 20.9-18 20.19—21.4 20.45—21.4 20.46 f. 20.47 21.1-4 21.5-38 21.9 21.25 f. 21.28 21.34 f. 22.1-23 22.1-6 22.7 22.16 22.24-39 22.24 22.37 22.40-53 22.53 22.54-65 22.59 22.66—23.12 22.66 23.13-32 23.28 f. 23.33-43 23.35 23.44-9 23.49 23.50-6 24.1-12 24.29 24.36-52 24.44 JOHN 8.12 9

101, 173 101 101 101, 173, 210 173 101, 152 101 101 101 152 76 101 101, 153 101 165, 170 293 165 90 165 f. 166, 170, 293-6 203 81 295 167 298 296 106 13 299 219 172 299 299 299 f. 300 301 297 301 167 301 f. 302 297, 302 f. 302 f. 297, 303 81,204 81 89 13 259 279

JOHN (contd.) 19.14 19.24 20.26 ACTS 1.8 1.21 f. 2 2.36 3.24 4.11 4.25-7 7.17-35 7.47 ff. 9—28 10 11.4 11.15 13.21 f. 14.26 15 15.20 15.21 15.29 16.13 18.23 18.25 19.21 20.7 ff. 20.7 21.1 21.21, 24 21.25 25.17 27.9 27.18 ROMANS 1.3 f. 2.1 ff. 2.13 2.18

2.19 3.25 4 5.3 5.15—6.11 9 10.15 f. 10.19-21 12—14 12 12.12

297 301 74 12 11 79 292 9 235 301 82 89 219 11 9 11 144 13 219 32, 85 14,85 32, 85 29 9, 12 2,92 13 84 16 9 2 32 9 84 9 292 f. 228 237 2 237 85 81, 91, 229, 240 227 91 229 246 162 228-30, 239 229 227

ROMANS (contd.) 12.14, 17 12.19, 20 f. 13 13.7 13.8 ff. 14 14.4, 10, 17 14.13-23 15.4 16 16.19

228 228 229 233 227 229, 233 228 228 14 219 230

1 CORINTHIANS 1.2b 1.19—2.10 3 3.10, 11-17 3.13 4.2-5 5.3 f. 5.7 6.5-10 6.7 7 7.17 7.34 f. 8 9.4-7 9.7-14 9.13 9.19 ff. 9.25 10.1 10.27 11.17 11.24 13.2 13.12 14 14.19 14.20 14.32 f. 15.1, 3 15.27 f.

220,224 219, 230 235 219 282 219 233 277 219 228 f. 228 f. 219 219 233 219 230 f. 14 233 150 14 219 219 274 233 232 14 2 230, 232 219 2 230-2

2 CORINTHIANS 1.17 ff. 3.7 3.14 9.6-10 10.9 f. 13.1

228 f. 233 14 232 219 233

GALATIANS 2 3.16-4.7 4.10 4.14 5.22 f. 6.6 6.7 EPHESIANS 1.1-4 2.8 f. 2.20 f. 3.3-5 3.4 f. 4.1-16 4.26 4.32 5.22 ff. COLOSSIANS 2.16 3.13 4.6 4.16 1 THESSALONIANS 2.14 ff. 4.16 5.1 ff.

219 248 54 230 232 2,92 232 234 234 232, 235 234 3,232, 235 233,236 234 233,236 233,236 54 228 f. 282 219 237,239 238 f. 238 f.

1 THESSALONIANS (contd) 5.5 ff. 238 f. 5.27 219 2 THESSALONIANS 2.2 3.17 1 TIMOTHY 1.7 4.3-5 4.13

ff.

219 219 54 54 3,15

2 TIMOTHY 3.15

15

TITUS 1.10 1.14

54 54

1 PETER 2.6 f. 3.18

235 91

2 PETER 3.16

221

REVELATION 1.3 21

3 235

INDEX OF EXTRA-BIBLICAL PASSAGES

GREEK AND LATIN AUTHORS Ambrose, De Mysteriis 1.1 Apost. Const. 2.57.5/8 8.4.6, 8.5.11 Athanasius: 39th Festival Letter Augustine: In Ep. ad Parthos, Prol. Barnabas, Ep. 18.1 Chronograph 354 Chrysostom: Horn. Adv. Jud. 6.7 In Act. Horn. 29.3 In Hebr. Horn. 8.4 Clement Alex.: Paed. 3.12.85 Strom. 6.5.39-41 1 Clement 5 47 Clementine Homilies 7.3.7 Cyril of Jerusalem: Catecheses Didache Apostolorum 1—6 1.1 2.5 7—13 14—15

94 54 54 13,222 4 94 8 54 54 54 94 60 219 221 94

91 276 94, 276 94, 276 276 f. 276 f., 295 16 277, 294 f. Didascalia Apostolorum 21 7 f., 297 Egeria, Peregrinatio 35—37 viii f., 73, 91, 244, 297 Epistula Apostolorum 15-17 294 Eusebius, H.E. iv.22.3 15,54 iv.23.11 221 Hegesippus, ap. Eus.: H.E. iv.22.3 15,54

Hermas, Vis. 2.4 3 Hippolytus: Ap. Trad. 16—18 91 16.6 283 20 f. 91 20.2, 8 281 Refut. vii. 25.3 221 Ignatius, Eph. 1.1 234 12.2 221, 224 Magn. 8.9 54 Irenaeus: Adv. Haer. iii. 21.2 13 Jerome, Comm. Matt. 25.6 293 40 Josephus, Ant. xi. 302-47 B.J. vi. 269 f. 22 53 Justin, I Apol. 53 61-5 276 65 f. 276 67 2, 15, 53, 75, 276 Dial. 103 2 Juvenal: 1 Sat. 1.1, 3.9, 8.126 Origen: 4, 108 f. Horn, in I Libr. Regn. ii 224 Passio Scil. 12 Pliny, Ep. 7.17.1 1 13 Plutarch, Moralia 968C Polycarp, Ep. 1.3 234 12.1 221, 234 224 13 221 13.2 Ps.-Philo: 187 Lib. Ant. Bibl. 8.8 121 40.2 Tertullian, De Bapt. 19 91 De Jej. 1.14 26,54

JEWISH AUTHORITIES MISHNAH Meg. 1.1 3.4-6 3.4 3.5 f. 3.5 3.6 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.10 Pes. 10.9 R.H. 1.1 1.2 Taan. 4.6 Zeb. 5.8

42 69 4, 19, 43, 45, 60-4, 290 60 33, 63, 248 62 f., 92 56 f., 92 39, 52, 56 52, 57, 110 107 298 24,288 84, 163 22,24,59, 110 298

BABYLONIAN TALMUD Bab. Bath. 14b 159 Git. 60a 106 Meg. 7a 43 23a 57, 108 107 25b 29-31 69 29b 19, 39,44 f., 58,62, 64, 106 30a 43,64 30b 107 31a 33,, 43, 62, 115, 130, 176, 213, 248 31b 46, 56, 62, 213 32a 14 Nid. 69b-71a 290 Pes. 91b-92a 91 f. R.H. 14a-15b 288 Sanh. 43a 301 Soferim 14.3 205 29 189, 196, 212 Yeb. 47ab 95 f.

JERUSALEM TALMUD Meg. iii. 10 Pes. viii. 8

107 91 f.

TOSEFTA Meg. 4.1-9 4.1-4 4.2 4.10 4.13 4.31 4.34 Sanh. 2.6 Yoma 13.1

62 44 42 56 52 107 107 38 59

MEKILTA ad 12.21 12.42 14.2, 9, 22 16.1 17.2 19.1 34.1

59 293 59 59 59 59 59

SIFRE 53 MIDRASH RABBAH Exod. 15.1 18.12 Lev. 3.6 Ruth 8.1 Frag. Targ., Exod. 15.18 Midr. Ps. 4.9, 116.9 Pes. Rab. 14b Seder 'Olam 5, 10 Zohar, 'Emor 98a

94 293 293 66 94, 185 293 185 110 59 189

GENERAL INDEX Abaye 64 f. Abel 49,215 Abraham 49, 77-81, 160, 167, 201, 216, 227, 248 Ackroyd, P. R. 159, 221 Advent 84, 162, 245 Aeschylus 189 Ahab 145, 148, 267-9 Ahijah 145,266 Alexandrinus, Codex 49, 74-6, 83 f., 242 f., 248-50, 295 Alt, A. 27 alternative haphfardt 106-11, 258 f. Ambrose 26, 53, 56 Anderson, G. W. 159, 174 f. Anna 142 f. angels, in Daniel 191 annual Cycle 19-31, 39 f., 62-5 anti-Marcionite Prologue 226 Aqiba 217 Aramaic Daniel 191-9 arcetic rhythm 231 Archelaus 152 Armenian Lectionary 4, 53-6, 73, 183, 297-9 Ars, curd d' 6 f., 12 Aseneth 94 Ashkenazi 158 Athaliah 149 f. Athanasius 13,222 Atonement, or Yom Kippur reading of Lev. 16—18 32-5, 37, 47, 54, 63; of Isaiah 110, 162^; of Jonah 175-9; of ben-Sira 208 celebration by Luke 85-7, 89, 296; by Matthew 213 f.; by Mark 244,249,252-4 Audet, J. P. 276 f. Augustine 4, 56 Baba Rabba 41 Babylonian New Year 22 baptism 91 f., 275 f. bar-mitsvah 95 Barnabas, Epistle of 94

Basil 56 Basilides 221 Bauer, W. 221,239 Baumstark, A. 222 f. Beasley-Murray, G. R. 92 Beelzebul 148 f., 258 Belteshazzar 200 Bentzen, A. 124 B'rFsMlh 61 Best, E. 248 beth-hammidrash 112 Bethlehem 79, 143 Beyer, H. W. 2 Biblia Hebraica 20, 31 f„ 37, 43, 52, 58, 174 Birkath-ha-Minim 44 Bligh.J. 90 Bodmer Papyrus, p" 74, 76, 83, 95, 242; cf. illustration on cover of book Bowker, J. 21, 65, 110 f„ 187 Brookes, R. see Pearl and Brookes Brown, S. 2 Buchler, A. 5, 20, 43, 46, 58 f., 62, 66, 105, 107 Burkitt, F. C. 4,56,201,297 Byzantine lectionary cycle 4, 73, 223, 297 Cadbury, H. J. 10, 13 Campenhausen, H. von 1, 3, 15, 221 f. Carrington, P. 91, 101, 243, 305 catechesis 91-5, 245, 275-8, 283 catechist 92 catechumens 92 f., 275-81; exorcism of 280 f.; care of 281-3 Charles, R. H. 234 Chronicler 38^0, 70-2, 126-9 Chrysostom, John 54, 56, 91 Clement of Alexandria 60, 94 1 Clement 219, 221 Clementine Homilies 94 Coggins, R. J. 40 combination of sidrdt 37, 46, 80, 83, 262, 282

Consolation, sabbaths of 109 f., 157, 163 Constantine 8 Cowley, A. 41 Creed, J. M. 9, 87, 149 Cuming, G. J. 219 Cumont, F. 201 Curses in Lev. and Deut. 46, 213 Cyril of Jerusalem 91 D-corpus 114-25, 140 Danby, H. 4,33,63 Daniel 191-204; Aramaic 191-9; Hebrew 199-204 Dani61ou, J. 91 Daube, D. 94,290 David 123-5, 128-30, 145, 150, 292 Dedication, or Hanukkah reading of Num. 7—8.4 62, 176 f.; reading of Zech. 3—4.7 176 f. celebration by Matthew 49, 213 f., 232, 234-7; by Luke 89 f., 146; by Mark 244,270-81 Delling, G. 13 Deutero- (II-) Isaiah 119, 157, 160-2 Deuteronomistic School 114-25,140 Dhorme, E. 189 Dibelius, M. 1 f. Didache 91-4, 276 f., 294 f. Didascalia Ap. 8 f., 54, 297 Diez Macho, A. I l l Dinkier, E. 2 Dionysius of Corinth 221 Dobschutz, E. von 60 f. Dodd, C. H. 224 f. Dold, A. 5, 26, 54, 56 Driver, G. R. 5 Dugmore, C. W. 276 Easter 90 f„ 276 f„ 304 Eaton, J. H. 112,262 Ecclesiastes 183 f., 205, 256, 258 edentations 76 Egeria viii f„ 4, 54, 73, 91, 244, 297 Eissfeldt, O. 112,114,118,123, 125 f., 159 f„ 174 f., 184 f„ 188-91 Elbogen, I. 20, 33, 37, 44, 57-9, 62, 65 f., 105, 205 Eleazar 172 Eli 144, 185, 187 Eliezer, R. 107 Elihu 188

Elijah 85, 89, 141, 145-7, 177, 266273, 280, 293 Eliot, T. S. 189 Elisha 145-8, 151, 266, 268-74 Elkanah 143 Ellis, E. E. 11 Emerton, J. A. 272 Emmanuel 168 Encyclopaedia Judaica 20, 94 epistles for public reading 219; circulation 219; collection 219 f.; knowledge of 220; use in church 221; canon of 221 f.; order of 222,227; in annual cycle 222,226 f. Epistula Apostolorum 294 Esther 183,214,291 Ethanim 22, 130 Eusebius 15,221 Evans, C. F. 1, 90, 159, 221 exorcism of catechumens 280 f. Ezra 25, 34 f., 46, 126, 201 Farrer, A. M. 193, 252, 257 fasts, four 24, 184 feasts, order of 21-3, 60 felling of tree 194 f. First sabbath 61 Fohrer, G. 25, 27 f., 33, 125, 189, 191 foil Introduction 74, 95 f., 98, 101 forbidden haphtardt 107 Form-critics 102, 242 f. formula citations in Matthew 212, 215-18, 251, 261 f. Fortescue, A. 5 'Four Nights' 293 Four Questions 289 f. Four sabbaths see Special Sabbaths Fruit-Trees, New Year of 24, 287 f. Gabriel 142, 168, 169, 204 Gallican lectionaries 5, 56, 73 Gaster, M. 40 f. Geldenhuys, N. 9 Gibbon, E. 107 Gibeah 143 Gibson, M. D. 8 Gideon 141 f., 167 Ginsburger, M. 293 gobala 299 Goodspeed, E. J. 220, 223-6 gospel 2 f., 246 Gottwald, N. K. 184

Grant, R. M. 221 Great Omission 84, 90 Great Sabbath 61, 177, 303 Greek lectionaries 4, 73, 223, 297 Green, H. B. 225 Guilding, A. 20, 58, 102, 305 Hahodesh 43 f„ 47 Halachoth Gedoloth 115 Halachoth Pesukoth 115 Hannah 142 f., 187 f. Hanukkah see Dedication haphfarah 39, 52, 105-13; forbidden 107 f.; length of 108 f.; Isaiahsequence 109 f.; of Consolation 109; origin of traditional h. 113 Harding, G. L. I l l Harnack, A. von 219-21, 224, 226 Harvey, A. E. 214 Heaton, E. W. 191 Hegesippus 15,53 Heinemann, J. 21 Hertz, J. H. 69,253 Hezekiah 151 f., 164, 175 Hillel 92,288 hillultm 34 Hippolytus 91, 221, 281, 283 Histories Cycle 114-40 Holiness Code 31-5 Holscher, G. 189 Hooker, M. D. 198 Huck, A. (-Lietzmann-Cross) 95 Ignatius 54,221,224,234 Iodae (Jehoiada) 150 Iou (Jehu) 149 Irwin, W. A. 189 Isaac Nappaha, R. 62, 64 f. Isaiah cycle 'l09f., 112, 157-64 Jaubert, A. 7 f. Jehoiada 150 Jehoiakim 152 Jehu 148 f. Jehudai Gaon 37, 45 Jeremiah 158-60 Jeremiah, R. 106 Jeremias, J. 275, 293 Jerome 293 Jewish Encyclopaedia 20,115,195 Jewish Year Book 69 Joachaz 150 Joash 149-51 Jobab 186 f.

John, Bp. of Jerusalem 91 Johnson, M. D. 185 Jonah 86, 174-6, 178 f., 213, 250 f. Joram 148 f. Jorim 144 Joseph at Pentecost 79, 170, 192 f., 195 f., 198 f„ 207 Joseph and Aseneth 94 Joseph, R., 106 Joshua 153, 297, 303 f. Joshua, R. 293 Judah ben-Ilai, R. 20, 57 f„ 60 f„ 65 Judah the Prince, R. 107 Judas Maccabaeus 137 Jungmann, J. A. 8, 223 Justin 2, 15, 53, 75, 276, 279 Kahle, P. 41 Kaiser, O. 159, 162 Kapelrud, A. S. 175, 179 Kerygma Petrou 60 f., 65 Ki Tissa' (Exod. 30.11—34) 64 Kippenberg, H. G. 40 Klauser, T. 5 Klein, G. 2,11-13 Knox, J. 220 Kohler, L. 189 Kol Nidrei 34 Korban 270 f. Kraus, H.-J. 21, 27, 29, 34, 93, 194 Lag-ba-'Omer 217 Lampstand 176 f. Laurentin, R. 75 Lazarus 171 f. leap-years 38,40 lectio continua: of Torah 4-6, 20 f., 32, 46, 62; of prophets 109, 111; of Gospels 4-6, 48-50, passim; of Epistles 222 f. length of readings 52 Lent 55 f. leprosy 151, 250 f. Levi 252 Leviticus Rabbah 66 Lietzmann, H. 220 Lohse, E. 11 f. Long Journey 84, 90-101 Maamads 62 f. Mabillon, J. 5 Maccabees 131-8, 140, 144, 177, 203, 271 Macdonald, J. 41

Maclean, J. 222 McNamara, M. I l l Malkuyot 85,162, 245 f. Manasseh, King 151 f. Mann, J. 20f.,66 Marcion 221 f., 227, 234 Marcus, R. 47 f. Martin, V. and Kasser, R. 76 Mary 142 Masora 65 Megillath Ta'anith 46 Meir, R. 20, 57, 60 f. Mekilta 59,65 Methurgeman 110 f., 158 Micaiah 146 Michel, O. 3 f., 14 f„ 53 Midrash Rabbah 65 Minbah

56 f„ 63, 252

miqra- 110, 130 Mitton, C. L. 220, 222, 226, 234 Modin 199 Monday services 56 f., 92 Moor, J. C. de 26 Moore, G. F. 32, 42 f., 84 f., 94 245, 259, 293 Morris, L. 21 Moses Maimonides 66 Mowinckel, S. 27, 262 Muratorian Canon 220, 222, 227 Naaman 151 Naboth 146 Nautin, P. 61 Nazirite 142,217 Nebuchadnezzar 153, 192-5, 199 Nestle, E. 75, 168, 236 Nestorian use 222 f. New Moons 28 f„ 60, 62, 65 New Year, or Ro'sh Hashshanah date of 19, 21, 23 f. reading of Gen. 21 f. 63, of Isaiah 162-^, of Joel 175-8, of 1 Maccabees 137 celebration by Luke 84 f., 87, 89, 170; by Matthew 49, 213 f., 218, 230-2; by Mark 243-51 defeat of sea-monsters 262 of Fruit-Trees 288 Nicholson, E. W. 124 Nineham, D. E. vii f., 3, 54, 90, 242, 264, 270, 275, 300 Ninth Ab 24, 110, 153, 183 f., 214 f., 253

Nisan cycle 19-26 Noachian Commandments 32, 85 Noah 49, 116, 118, 166 f., 215, 295 Noth, M. 27,114,116 Nubia 215 Obadiah 146; prophet 174 f. Octave of Easter 73 f., 276 'Omer 217 order of feasts 21-3, 60 order of prophets 159,174-6 Origen 4, 108f. Oxford Society for Historical Theology 221 Papias 53 Parah, sabbath 47, 291 Parousia, expected at Passover 226, 238 f., 244, 293-5 Passover: reception of proselytes 47, 91 f., of catechumens 91-4, 275; readings from Torah 63, from Joshua 115 f., from Tobit 132 f., of Song 183, of Daniel 199-204; replaced by Holy Week 7 f„ 54; celebration by Matthew 49, 213215, 226, by Mark 244,276,293304, by Luke 293-304 Pearl, C. and Brookes, R. 213, 217, 303 Pentecost feast of law-giving (Exod. 19 f.) 63, 79, 193-5, 212; of oaths 194 second day of 63 twenty-four hour celebration 189 f. felling of tree 194 f. reading from Isaiah 170, from Hosea 197 f., of Ps. 119 189, 196, 212, of Ruth 183-5, of Job 186-90, of Aramaic Daniel 191-9, from Tobit 132 f., from 1 Macc. 137, from ben-Sira 206 baptism till 91 celebration by Luke 79, by Matthew 49, 212-15, 218, 227230, by Mark 244 Perrot, Ch. 20 p'tOffdt

20

Philo 47 f„ 65 Pliny 1 Plumley, J. M. 215

Pollack, G. 65 Polycarp 221,224,234 Porter, J. R. 21, 124 Potin, J. 212 Prologue, anti-Marcionite 226 Prometheus Vinctus 189 prophetic books, order of 159 proselytes 91-3 Psalms of Solomon 292 Psalter, cyclical use of 183 Pseudo-Philo 121, 186 f. Purim 42-4,47, 62,183,214 Purvis, J. D. 40 Qumran: Isaiah A scroll 5, Two Ways 94, Targum of Job 111 Rab 45,58,60 Rabbah 106 Rachel 50, 78, 216 f. Rad, G. von 27, 42, 114, 118, 125, 189 Rahab 116 f. Rahlfs, A. 176 Rapoport, S. L. 65 Rashi 32 Redactors 35-8, 120-1, 126-32 Rengstorf, K. H. 9 Renoux, A. 4, 54 Rigaux, B. 91 Righetti, M. 4 f., 15, 56, 109 Roberts, B. J. 40 Roberts, C. H. 215 Rordorf, W. 276 Ro'sh Hashshanah see New Year Rowley, H. H. 40, 192 Rudolph, W. 184 Sa'adia 41 Sabbe, M. 270 Sadducees 40,43,46 Samaritans 40-2, 147 f. Samson 141-3, 148 Samuel 142-4 Samuel, of Babylon 45, 58 Sanballat 40 Sarah 77f.,216 Saul 137, 144 f. Schmithals, W. 220,222 Schulz, S. 9, 11 Schurmann, H. 1, 9, 82, 168 Stillitan Martyrs 223 Scrivener, F. H. A. 4,223,297

Second Adar 38, 46 Seder 'Olam 59 s'dhartm 57, 59, 62, 65 f. Selichot 213 Selwyn, E. G. 91 Sephardi 158 s'tumdt 20 Shammai 92,288 Shechem 208 Shema' 55,96,284 Sheqalim 44-6, 58-60, 62,64 f., 106, 290 Shewbread 145,274 Shiloh 143 Shofarot 85, 162, 245 f. Shunem 147 Simhath Torah 22, 25, 45, 115 Simeon 142, 167 f. Simeon b. Eleazar, R. 46 Simon, M. 32, 54 Sinai 146, 212 f., 217 f. Snoy, T. 270 Solomon 129 f., 137, 145, 184, 204 f., 250, 253 f., 258 f., 262 Song of Songs 183 f., 203 Sonne, I. 20 f., 65 Sopherim 129, 204, 210 Special Sabbaths 42-6, 61 f. Spirit at Pentecost 79, 170 Stenning, J. F. 158 Strack-Billerbeck 45,301 Streeter, B. H. 150 Sunday worship only, in Luke 87, 89, 296 Swaans, W. J. 91 Syriac lectionaries 4, 56, 73 Tabernacles, or Sukkot reading from Lev. 33-5, 37, 47, 63; from 2 Sam. 124; from 1 Kings 129 f.; from Isaiah 162-4; from the Twelve 175-7; from the Third Canon 183, 200, 205, 208 celebrated by Luke 86-9, 145, by Matthew 49, 213 f., 232, by Mark 244,256-64 tablet 168-70 Tamar 184-6 Targum: of Law 40 f., 52, of Prophets 107, 110 f., 158 Tashltkh 176 Tertullian 26,54,91,220,222,227

Ttsawweh (Exod. 27.20—30.10) 64 Theophilus 2,92 Third Canon 52, 183-211 Thoou (Toi) 150 Thursday services 56 f., 92 Tishri cycle 19, 23, 25, 58, 65 f. Tobit 132 f., 142, 203 f. Torrey, C. C. 163 Transfiguration 90, 146, 270, 280 tree-felling at Pentecost 194 Triennial Cycle 19 f., 31, 39 f., 56-

Way, Christian 93 f., 245, 278 Wayyaq'hel (Exod. 35—38.20) 64 Weeks, Feast of see Pentecost Wellhausen, J. 40, 149 Werner, E. 5 Westermann, C. 112, 119, 159 Widows 165 f., 170, 210, 292 f. Wilkinson, J. viii, 54 f., 244, 297 f. Wisdom 205 Writings 52, 183-211 Wurzburg Comes 223

Trito- (ni-) Isaiah 157, 161 f. Trocm<5, E. 2,11,13 trumpet-blowing see Shofarot Two Ways 93-4,276

Ximenes 5

66

Ugarit 26 Unnik, W. C. van 13, 15 Uzziah 151 Vaux, R. de 21 f., 42 Vermes, G. 121 Vianney, J.-B. 6 f. Victorinus 26, 54 Virgin Conception 168-70 Vftlkel, M. 9, 11 Walton, R. C. 1

Year, Jewish 32, 54 Yemen 65 Ydm hadDtn 162 Yom Kippur see Atonement Zahn, T. 220,224,226,234 Zakor 42-4,47,62,291 Zarephath 145 f., 151, 266, 273 Zechariah, martyr 150 Zechariah, prophet 160, 175-7 Zechariah (NT) 141-3, 167-70 Zeno 26,54 Zikronot 85, 162, 245 f. Zodiac 201 Zunz, L. 58