Chapter 357 of 404

Notes to Chapter 18

1 Schweitzer, Quest, 398. Schweitzer favored the latter opinion, against Wrede (who favored the former).

2 Evans, “Activities,” 27. He notes that the Roman governor had Jesus executed as a king (23-24) and that Jesus expected to drink wine with them “anew” in the kingdom (Mk 14:25 [cf. 1 Cor 11:26]; p. 21).

3 Bultmann, Word, 9. He was in a sense right to observe that Jesus was not a traditional messianic figure (Theology, 27).

4 Schweitzer, Quest, 330-98; cf. Weiss, Proclamation, 115, 128-30 (Jesus believed God would make him Messiah when God established the kingdom).

5 See Aarde, Fatherless, 154 (who also emphasizes Jesus’ relationship with God as his Father, an emphasis noted below); cf. Capps, Biography.

6 For one example of this extreme approach, see Mack, Lost Gospel, 4-5. Did later Gentile Christians assign Jesus to a category they could hardly have created, when they often failed to comprehend even what “anointed one” meant in Judaism?

7 2 Cor 11:4 does not define “another Jesus” as a non-messianic one, and the opponents plainly do view him as “Christ” in 2 Cor 11:13, 23. We might encounter this problem later, in 1 Jn 2:22, but this perspective seems to involve people who have left the dominant Jesus movement (2:19), whether to accommodate the demands of the synagogue (the setting often assigned to John’s Gospel; cf. Rev 2:9; 3:9) or for an early form of docetism (cf. 1 Jn 4:2; 5:6; later, Ignatius Trall. 9-10; Smyrn. 3; Ep. Barn. 5; Justin Dial. 103.7).

8 Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:594-601 (noting esp. 2 Sam 7).

9 Marshall, Origins, 54-56; Witherington, Christology, 272-73.

10 Meyer, “Deed,” 171-72.

11 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 234; cf. Beasley-Murray, “Kingdom,” 27-32.

12 So even Winter, Trial, 108-9.

13 Jos. Ant. 17.285, 295; Brown, Death, 968. As Fredriksen, Christ, 123, notes, whether or not Jesus claimed a messianic title, “he certainly died as if he had.”

14 Harvey, History, 13-14; Stanton, Gospel Truth, 173.

15 Blinzler, Trial, 213, citing Dig. 48.4.1-4.

16 E.g., Dio Cass. 57.4.5-6; 57.9.2; 57.19.1; 57.23.1-2.

17 Tac. Ann. 15.44.

18 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 321-22. Jesus’ execution as a royal pretender leads many scholars to this conclusion (e.g., Witherington, Christology, 104, 116; Stanton, Gospel Truth, 173-87).

19 Sanders, Figure, 242, suggests that Jesus’ view of his royalty may not have been that he was a messiah, but rather that he was God’s eschatological viceroy. These figures, however, are easily coalesced.

20 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 307. The same conclusion is argued from a variety of data; cf. e.g., Chilton, “Announcement,” 168. Raymond Brown likewise concludes that some of Jesus’ followers may have thought him the Messiah, but that he responded ambivalently because his mission defined the term differently than the popular title would suggest (Brown, Death, 473-80; cf. Marshall, Origins, 89- 90).

21 Outside the Septuagint, Diaspora Judaism rarely used the term, however; even Sib. Or. 2.45 is a Christian interpolation. The most obvious exception would be disputes about “Chrestus” in Rome cited by Suetonius (see above in ch. 4), but if this refers to Jesus, the title could have been introduced mainly by Christians.

22 Meeks, Urban Christians, 94; Hooker, Message, 13, 65; Ladd, Criticism, 96.

23 Morris, Romans, 37.

24 Ladd, Theology, 140-41.

25 Cf. Ps. Sol. 17:21-25.

26 Mk 14:61-62 accepts a messianic title, but cf. more ambiguously Matt 26:63-64; for a combination, Lk 22:67-70.

27 Cf. Catchpole, “Entry.”

28 Witherington, Christology, 104.

29 Witherington, Christology, 105. On authenticity, see also Losie, “Entry.”

30 So Keck, History, 120.

31 A donkey could cost between two months’ and two years’ wages, depending on its age and condition. If a farmer had two, however, he sometimes rented one out (Lewis, Life, 130).

32 Sanders, Figure, 254.

33 See arguments in Tan, Zion Traditions, 138-43. In employing the title “triumphal entry” I defer to common usage rather than evaluating its proposed relationship to Roman triumphs.

34 For the suggestion of a limited-scale event, cf. Catchpole, “Entry”; Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 306.

35 Cf. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 308; pace Borg, Vision, 186 n. 9.

36 Keck, History, 120 (comparing the significance of Luther’s 95 theses, recognized only after the event, and noting that Jesus’ failure to explicitly claim kingship prevented this entry from being useful against him at his trial).

37 See m. Pes. 5:7; 9:3; 10:5-7; tos. Pisha 8:22; b. Pes. 117a; cf. Mk 14:26; cf. Moore, Judaism, 2:42; Jeremias, Eucharistic Words, 255-56; Barclay, Child, 42; Safrai, “Religion,” 809; Stendahl, School, 65; at other feasts, e.g., m. Suk. 3:10; 4:8; tos. Suk. 3:2; b. Shab. 21b, bar.; Suk. 38b.

38 Tos. Suk. 3:2; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 2:8.

39 Pilgrims often sang en route to festivals (Sanders, Judaism, 128-29). Many parents would undoubtedly begin rehearsing it with their children long before then; one might compare the extended prologues to holidays today, except with less mercantile incentive. Second-century rabbis applied to the Hallel the same rules applied to other liturgy (tos. Meg. 2:2).

40 Jeremias, Eucharistic Words, 256-57 and n. 3.

41 “O save!” which had become an acclamation of praise (Moore, Judaism, 2:48; Lane, Mark, 398).

42 Cf. Smallwood, “Priests”; Horsley, “Priests”; Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 315.

43 With e.g., Malina and Rohrbaugh, Gospels, 128-29; Graves and May, Preaching Matthew, 81- 82; Keener, Matthew, 495. The divisions between rural and urban, and between Galilee and Jerusalem, were important in this period; see Keener, John, 228-31.

44 Cf. Judg 10:4; 1 Kgs 1:44; cf. discussion in Sanders, Figure, 254; Witherington, Christology, 106. An ass was of lower status than a horse (Babrius 76.18-19); later, Pesiq. Rab. 36:1 provides the Messiah with a truly royal mount (the four creatures of Ezek 1).

45 Knowledge of Zech 9:9 could have enabled him to avoid a difficult periphrastic expression (Gundry, Old Testament, 197-98).

46 Evans, “Hope,” 375, points out that Mark, in contrast to Matthew and John later, makes no explicit connection to the Zechariah text (though he suggests that Zecharian imagery pervades Jesus’ own mission in the passion narrative, 388).

47 B. Sanh. 98a; 99a; Gen. Rab. 75:6; Edgar, “Messianic Interpretation,” 48-49; Lachs, Commentary, 344.

48 Moule, Mark, 87; Gundry, Matthew, 409; Sanders, Figure, 242; cf. Borg, Vision, 174; Luciani, “Seguidores.” Duff, “March,” suggests that Mark ironically inverts the Gentile custom of triumphal entry into a conquered city and also Zechariah’s images of a divine warrior.

49 Klein, “Messianism,” 201, relates Jesus to the priestly and royal Messiahs at Qumran, but we argue here from analogy only that Messianic concepts were gradually adapted to the communities and social situations they addressed.

50 Although John’s Jesus repeatedly hints at his exalted status, in public he often avoids being explicit, speaking in riddles (cf. Jn 2:9, 19-22; 3:13; 7:25-27; 10:34-36; 12:16; 14:21-22; 16:29-30; 18:19-23, 33-37). See Keener, John, 76-77, 290, 397, 545-46, 771-72, 824, 870; cf. Smith, John (1999), 210; for riddles in John, see Thatcher, Riddles; for riddling in the Jesus tradition more generally, Thatcher, Riddler.

51 Wrede, Messianic Secret, 17-18, 228.

52 E.g., Ellis, “Composition”; Burkill, Light, 1-38; idem, “Strain”; Anderson, Mark, 46; Wright, People of God, 104.

53 See e.g., Chrys. Hom. Jn. 3.

54 Cullmann, State, 26.

55 Hurtado, Mark, xxiii; Marshall, Origins, 89-90.

56 Longenecker, Christology, 68-73.

57 See Witherington, Christology, 265-67. For supporters of various views or aspects of the “messianic secret,” see more fully Keener, Matthew, 261-63.

58 Cf. Isoc. Nicocles/Cyprians 46, Or. 3.36; Plut. Praising Oneself Inoffensively, Mor. 539A-547F, especially 15, Mor. 544D; Quint. Inst. Or. 11.1.17-19; Lyons, Autobiography, 44-45, 68-69. On the relevance of avoiding self-boasting to Jesus’ mission, see also Neyrey, “Shame of Cross,” 127.

59 Keener, Matthew, 262.

60 Compare “mysteries” in apocalyptic texts, especially in Daniel and the Dead Sea Scrolls (e.g., 1QS 5.11-12; 9.18; 11.3-5; 1QM 3.9; 14.14; 17.9; 1QH 12.11-13, 20; 13.2, 13-14; other sources in our discussion of parables). For the sake of brevity here, we refer to Gibbard, “Mystery,” 109-11; Brown, “Mysterion”; idem, Mystery; Ellis, “Uses,” 208; Longenecker, Exegesis, 41-42; and especially Caragounis, Mysterion.

61 See full documentation in Keener, Matthew, 378-79; also Eunapius Lives 371-72, 468. Suspense was a rhetorical technique (e.g., Cic. Verr. 2.5.5.10-11) but is less relevant here.

62 Schweitzer, Quest, 386, thinks that Peter (by his “confession”) and Judas betrayed the messianic secret; although the latter is possible, neither is certain.

63 See Rhoads and Michie, Mark, 87. On a literary level, one may add the obduracy of disciples, particularly in Mark, as a foil for Jesus (in John, cf. Braun, “Vie”).

64 Thompson, “God,” 54.

65 See Rhoads and Michie, Mark, 87; cf. Augustine Tractates on John, 113. Times can dictate discretion; a pagan who claimed his teacher divine had to be very discreet when Christian emperors were in power (Eunapius Lives 461). Such observations are hardly new; Chrys. John, hom. 3, recognizes the messianic secret and thinks it was the model for Paul’s missions strategy in Acts 17:31.

66 E.g., Is 9:7; Jer 23:5. That the eschatological ruler would be a restoration after the Davidic rule had been cut off was suggested by preexilic prophets (Jesse’s “stump” in Is 11:1; Amos 9:11; on the authenticity of the latter, see discussion at Acts 15:16-18 in my Acts commentary).

67 Ps. Sol. 17.21; 4Q252 frg. 1, col. 5, lines 1-4; b. Sanh. 97b-98a; p. Suk. 5:1, §7; Gen. Rab. 88:7; Song Rab. 2:13, §4; Pesiq. Rab. 15:14/15; Tg. on Jer 30:9. See Fitzmyer, Essays, 113-26; Longenecker, Christology, 109-10; Kee, Community, 126, especially on the Dead Sea Scrolls.

68 A concept that made more sense in some ancient Near Eastern (esp. Egyptian and Hittite) than Hellenistic settings; see De Vaux, Israel, 104; cf. ANET 338 (though this is merely ritual anointing).

69 For texts that could be regarded as messianic by some of Jesus’ contemporaries, see e.g., Ps 2:2; 18:50 [17:51]; 132[131]:10, 17.

70 In all of Pauline literature, for example, “son of David” christology appears only in Rom 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8.

71 Cf. e.g., Witherington, Christology, 83.

72 Cf. Feldman, “David.”

73 Kraeling, John the Baptist, 52. Some professed signs-prophets also sought kingship in broader Mediterranean culture (Diod. Sic. 34/35.2.5-6, 22-23).

74 See Freyne, Galilee, 194-95, on Ant. 18.85-87; 20.97-98, 169-71; War 2.261-66; Acts 5:36; 21:38; cf. also Crossan, Historical Jesus, 158-68.

75 Cf. Moore, Judaism, 2:346. Rivkin, “Messiah,” 65, contrasts the set belief in the world to come and the resurrection with the greater flexibility on Messianic belief after the revolt. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 110-31 do, however, point out that popular attempts to rule often focused on commoners rather than a revived Davidic dynasty.

76 ARN 31, §67 B.

77 Sipre Deut. 34.4.3 (resurrection in the Messianic era); p. Ket. 12:3, §13 (R. Meir); speculation flourished again in the Amoraic period (e.g., b. Meg. 12a); the Davidic Messiah remained later (e.g., Tg. Jer on 30:9). Aberbach, “Hzqyhw,” thinks that “Hezekiah” was sometimes a code-name for R. Judah when some still thought him the Messiah.

78 For groups that emphasized biblical messianic hopes, see Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 102- 10. 4Q521 frs. 2, 4, col. 1, line 1, suggests a global or even cosmic (though this may be hyperbole) role for the Messiah.

79 There is debate as to how widespread or regular their recitation was in this period, but they are surely some of the earliest samples of postbiblical Jewish prayer we have (cf. discussion in e.g., Schiffman, “Crossroads,” 151; Oesterley, Liturgy, 54-67; Levine, “Synagogue,” 19).

80 Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 109. In a later period redemptive work suggested genealogical correctness rather than Davidic descent being primary; cf. Kaufmann, “Idea.”

81 4 Ezra; 2 Bar.; Test. Twelve Patriarchs; cf. perhaps the recently discovered inscription in Yardeni, “Prophecy.”

82 See Wittlieb, “Bedeutung.”

83 Collins, “Son of Man.”

84 Wächter, “Messianismus,” stresses this political aspect of Jewish expectations, distinguishing them from the early Christian view defined by Jesus’ mission. That Jesus did not inaugurate an immediate earthly kingdom is one of the primary objections to his Messiahship in contemporary Jewish scholarship; cf. Berger and Wyschogrod, Jewish Christianity, 18-19; Klausner, Jesus, 414; Borowitz, Christologies, 21.

85 E.g., 1QSa 2.11-17; 4Q174 3.11-12. Evans, “Messianism,” 701-2, finds thirty Qumran texts describing “anointed” individuals, with the royal Messiah probably in CD 12.23-13.1; 14.19 (=4Q266 frg. 18, 3.12); 19.10-11; 20.1; 1QS 9.11; 1QSa 2.11-12, 14-15, 20-21; 4Q252 frg. 1 v. 3-4; 4Q381 frg. 15.7; 4Q382 frg. 16.2; 4Q458 frg. 2, 2.6; 4Q521 frg. 2 + 4, 2.1; 4Q521 frg. 7.3. The “firstborn” of 4Q369 frg. 1, col. 2.6-7 probably evokes biblical messianic language.

86 E.g., 1 Macc 14:41-42, with the functions of ruler, priest, commander, and possibly prophet sought for Simon Maccabeus.

87 See the Wicked Priest of 1QpHab 8.8-10; 9.4-7; 11.5-6; 12.5; and the role of Zadokites in the community. The view that the Teacher of Righteousness is modeled after Judas Maccabee (Eisenman, Maccabees, 35) has not garnered much support.

88 Evans, “Messianism,” 703, lists OT precedent for the two messiahs (Jer 33:15-18; Hag 2:1-7; Zech 4:11-14; 6:12-13; 4Q254 frg. 4 alludes to Zech 4:14).

89 Test. Reub. 6:8; Test. Jud. 21:1-2; cf. Test. Sim. 5:5 with 1QM. On Melchizedek as eschatological priest, see Puech, “Manuscrit.” He was not likely the ruling messiah, however (Collins, “Messiah before Jesus,” 34).

90 See Jub. 31:12-17 and 31:18-20; cf. similarly Test. Iss. 5:7; Test. Dan 5:4, 10; Test. Naph. 5:3-5; 8:2. Schniedewind, “King,” roots the dual messianic expectation in the Chronicler’s ideal leadership pattern (especially 1 Chron 17:14).

91 Jub. 31:18-20; see Noack, “Qumran and Jubilees,” 201.

92 See Charles, Jubilees, xiv (although we may date Jubilees somewhat earlier than he suggests on xiii).

93 Higgins, “Priest,” 333; idem, “Messiah,” 215-19; Laurin, “Messiahs,” 52. Test. Benj. 11:2 seems to support a figure from both Judah and Levi (perhaps reflecting a Jewish-Christian desire to derive one of Jesus’ parents from Levi, cf. Lk 1:5, 36). The Scrolls conflate various anointed figures (e.g., 4Q174 3.10-13; 4Q252 frg. 1, 5.1, 3; 11Q13 2.15-20).

94 Aune, Prophecy, 123 (citing Test. Reub. 6:5-12; Test. Levi 18:2-9; 1QS 9.10-11; 1QSa 12-17; cf. CD 19.10-11; 20.1); Villalón, “Deux Messies,” 53-63, especially 63; Burrows, More Light, 297-311 (or maybe three, 311); Jóczwiak, “Mesjanizm” (or even three); Jonge, “Anointed,” 141-42; Brown, “Messianism,” 54-66. In “Theory,” 56, Brown still thought there were probably two Messiahs, but noted that not all texts were clear or represented the same period.

95 Smith, “Variety”; Abegg, “Messiah.”

96 Longenecker, Christology, 114; Driver, Scrolls, 468-69; Priest, “Mebaqqer”; cf. Priest, “Messiah.” Wcela, “Messiah(s),” finds in the Damascus Document (CD 12.23-13.1; 14.19; 19.10-11; 20.1; cf. 7.17-21) one military Messiah with a priest who could be an Aaronic Messiah (342); 1QS 9.11 has two Messiahs, but often a priestly companion to the Messiah is in view, and the Damascus Document probably sees both as one individual (347). Cf. Smith, “Begetting,” 224, who thinks both anointed ones may be “survivals of the same figure,” but is not certain that either is eschatological or messianic.

97 CD 12.23-13.1 (albeit with an emended misspelling of 017

); 14.19 (not all the word is clear, but the relevant ending is); 20.1; also the warrior Messiah of 1QM 11.7-8. Puech, “Apocalypse,” considers 4Q521 an “apocalypse messianique” (but contrast Bergmeier, “Beobachtungen”); García Martínez, “Textos,” finds a messianic king (4Q252, 285, 521), priest (4Q540) and heavenly figure (4Q246).

98 LaSor, “Messiahs,” 429; Gaster, Scriptures, 392; Bruce, History, 122. Stefaniak, “Poglady,” thinks Qumran stressed eschatology more than messianology; this is probably right, unless the Messiah was a righteous Teacher redivivus.

99 Silberman, “Messiahs,” 82, questioning whether the expectation is even eschatological in the final sense. Perhaps the title originally applied to the first Teacher of Righteousness.

100 Cf. the priest’s precedence to the “Messiah” in 1Q28a 2.19-20; “Moses God’s anointed [‘messiah’]” in 4Q377 frg. 2, 2.5; 1Q22 lines 11-12 even adds Eleazar to Joshua in Deut 31:7, to couple priest and ruler figures; see also the “anointed priest” in 4Q376 frg. 1, col. 1 line 1. Some much later rabbis also spoke of a priest “anointed for battle,” i.e., an eschatological priest to accompany the troops, along with the Davidic Messiah (b. Yoma 73b; Song Rab. 2:13, §4).

101 For the suffering and triumphant Messiahs, see e.g., 3 En. 45:5; for a suffering Messiah, see e.g., the various views offered in b. Suk. 52a; p. Suk. 5:2, §2; Pesiq. Rab. 31:10; 34:2; 36:1-2, and see data listed in Torrey, “Messiah”; for a Messiah suffering for Israel’s sins, cf. Pesiq. Rab. 36:1-2; 37:1; for a servant Messiah, cf. 2 Bar. 70:9. The doctrine of two Messiahs continued in ninth-century Karaite doctrine (possibly from Essene roots?); cf. Wieder, “Messiahs.”

102 Driver, Scrolls, 465-66, thinks the rabbinic picture could shed light on the Scrolls, but this proposition takes too little account of their traditions’ divergent dates. Kuhn, “Messias,” 208, points out that the Scrolls subordinate the political Messiah to the priestly one, but rabbinic literature offers no parallel to this (though Jub. 31 and some other texts might).

103 E.g., Dan 9:26, which is probably messianic in the context of 11Q13 2.18; see Rosenberg, “Messiah,” who (less accurately) predicates the prominence of Qumran’s Levitic Messiah on the decease of the Davidic one. Brownlee, “Servant,” argues that 1QIs(a) applies the suffering servant of Is 52-53 to the “anointed” community as a whole (he and Reider, “MSHTY,” debate the Hebrew back and forth on 27-28). Justin argues from the Scriptures for a suffering Messiah and in his account persuades Trypho (Justin Dial. 39; 90.1; Higgins, “Belief,” 304, regards Trypho’s concession as unusual).

104 So Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 140; Yamauchi, “Concord,” 165-66 (this seems more reasonable than Berger’s attribution of the doctrine to typology; cf. “Themes”). If a tradition of testing the Messiah existed (e.g., Bar Kochba by his sense of smell, b. Sanh. 93b), it may have arisen the same way (Rivkin, “Meaning,” 397, thinks instead that the Pharisees used this tradition in their opposition to Jesus).

105 In 4Q285, fr. 5, line 4; e.g., Tabor, “Messiah” (among others).

106 Vermes, Religion, 211 n. 1; idem, “Forum”; idem, “Messiah Text”; Bockmuehl, “Messiah”; Abegg, “Hope”; Martone, “Testo”; Abegg, “Introduction to 4Q285”; Evans, “Messianism,” 703. Collins, “Servant,” doubts that 4Q541 (on a suffering sage/priest) is messianic. The same may be said for a rising messiah in the “Gabriel’s Revelation” inscription; Israel Knohl’s reading of lacunae conveniently supports his earlier book (soundly critiqued in e.g., Collins, “Essene Messiah”), but differs from epigrapher Ada Yardeni’s reading, and will probably not prevail (correspondence from Craig Evans, July 23, 2008).

107 See Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 234; cf. Beasley-Murray, “Kingdom,” 27-32. Cf. Meyer, “Ministry,” 352 (emphasis his): “Jesus understood himself as the climactic and definitive fulfiller of the hopes of Israel.”

108 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 321-22. Jesus’ execution as a royal pretender leads many scholars to this conclusion (e.g., Witherington, Christology, 104, 116; Stanton, Gospel Truth, 173-87).

109 Sanders, Figure, 242.

110 Brown, Death, 473-80; cf. Marshall, Origins, 89-90.

111 Hengel, “Messiah,” 344. On 346 he notes claims like Jesus’ warning against taking offense at him (Matt 11:6//Lk 7:23) and that he was greater than Solomon or the temple (Matt 12:42//Lk 11:32).

112 Beasley-Murray, “Kingdom,” 27-32 (indicating Jesus’ Messiahship).

113 Hengel, “Messiah,” 345.

114 Hengel, “Messiah,” 347.

115 Hengel, “Messiah,” 348.

↑ Back to top