The Didache And Scripture
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
(a) The Old Testament (1) Did. XIV, 3. adrn yap éorw 7 pyfeioa tno Kupiov'' 'Ev mavTt TOmw Kal xpovw mpoadgéepey por Ovoiay Kabapay' étt BactAeds péyas eiui, Aéyer KUpLos, Kal TO GvOa Mov
Bavpaorov ev tois €Bveat.'
Malachi i, 11, 14.
For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered unto my name and a pure offering; for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts.
For I am a great king, saith the Lord of hosts, and my name is terrible among the Gentiles.
(2) Did. XVI, 7. od mavrwv Sé, Grd ds eppeOn *°"Héer 6 KUptos Kal mavTEs ot dyvou per adTod.'
Zech. xiv, 5.
And the Lord my God shall come, and all the holy ones with thee.
(3) Did.
TTI, 8. yivou paxpdbvpos .
. Kal tpéuwv tods Adyous 81a mavrds, ods HKovcas.
Isa. Ixvi, 2.
. even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit and that trembleth at my word.
Barnabas XIX, 4. éon mpais, gon jovxwos, on tpépwv tovs Adyous ods 7KovCas.
(4) Did. IV, 13. od yu) eynaradlans evrodAds Kuplov, dudd£ets de & mapéAaBes, purire mpooribels pre adaipav.
Deut. xii, 32.
What thing so-ever I command you, that shall ye observe to do: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
Barn. XIX, 11. puadéers & mrapéAaBes, pnre mpooribets LATE adaipav.
(5) Did. III, 7.
\ a toe S€ mpaits émel of mpaeis KAnpovopcovar THY yh.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
Ps. xxxvii, Ir.
But the meek shall inherit the land.
Matt. v, 5. paxdpvou of mpacis dre adrol KAnpovoyjoover THY 'yh.
(6) Did. I, 2. mdvra S€ doa édv Oedjons pt) ylvecbal oor, Kat oD GAAw pr) Tole.
Tobit iv, 15.
And what thou thyself hatest, do to no man.
Matt. vii, 12. mdvra obv dca dv OéAnte va modow dpiv ot avOpwrot ottTw Kal tuets Trovetre abrois.
Acts xv, 20.
Kal doa pm OdAovew éavtois yivesbar érépois pn) Trovetre.
(7) Did. I, 3. vynorevere Sé irép rdv Swwkdvrwv dps.
Ps. xxxv, 13.
But as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth.
I afflicted my soul with fasting.
(8) Did. I, 1.
680i .
. pla ris Cwiis Kal ula tod Oavdrov.
Jer. xxi, 8.
Thus saith the Lord: Behold I set before you the way of life and the way of death.
Matt. vii, 13, 14.
4 600s % dmdyovoa eis riv andActav .
. 1) 000s 4 amdyovoa els THY Cwnv.
(9) Did. II, 2. od« emOupjoeis Ta TOD mAnatov.
Barn. XIX, 6. od ph yévn éemObvpdv ta tod mAnolov gov.
Exod. xx, 17.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's (x0) Did. IV, 3.
Kpwets Sixaiws, od Ajbn mpdcwrov eAéeyéar emt TapaTTw@pacw.
Barn. XIX, 4. od Ajpbyn mpdcwrov éedéyEar twa eri mapanrmpart.
XIX, II.
Kpweis ducatws.
Deut. i, 16-17.
And judge righteously between a man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him.
Ye shall not respect persons in judgment ..
Prov. xxxi, 9. Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and minister judgment to the poor and needy.
John vii, 24.
Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
(11) Did. V, 2. praca dyandvres.
The same words are found in Barn. XX, 2.
Ps. iv, 2.
How long will ye love vanity ..
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
(12) Did. V, 2. ovets téxvwv.
The same words are found in Barn. XX, 2.
Wisdom xii, 7.
Murderers of their own helpless babes.
(13) Did. X, 3. od éxrwwas Tra mavTa.
Wisdom i, 14.
For he created all things that they might have being.
Ecclus. xviii, 1.
He that liveth for ever created all things in common.
(14) Did. XII, 1. ds dé 6 épydpevos év dvopart Kuptov.
Ps. cxviii, 26.
Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Cf. Matt. xxi, 9.
(15) Did. XIII, 5. rHv drapynv AaBav Sos Kara TH evtodjv.
Compare the laws in the Mosaic books with regard to the payment of first-fruits.
(16) Did. XIII, 3. adrot (of mpodirar) yap eiow of apxrepets Dov.
Exod. vii, 1.
And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a God to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
These are the only cases in the Didache in which there is any use made of the Old Testament.
Sixteen such examples is a very small number for such a document, especially as we shall see some are very doubtful and some are found in Barnabas also.
Book VII of the Apostolic Constitutions adds many more Old Testament references to the Didache.
Barnabas, Clement of Rome and all Christian writers who do not, like Marcion, reject the Old Testament are full of such references.
Arnold ! said, '' Clement of Rome tries to make Old Testament phrases his own, while the Didache lives in them."
This is not true.
In the first two examples set out at the beginning of this chapter are the only two explicit quotations from the Old
Testament.
They are introduced with the conventional phrases for introducing scriptural quotations, but they are freely adapted.
In the first it will be seen that the Didache moulds together the two verses of Malachi.
It omits the 1 Zeitschrift fiir Kivchenrecht.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
gI first half of verse 11, adds cai ypovw,1 and omits the reference to "incense."
"To me" is put instead of "' to my name."
In place of " Lord of hosts "' the Didache merely says " the Lord."
The Septuagint has emd¢avées, a mistranslation of the Hebrew's $73, but there is no need to suppose that the Didache knew the original Hebrew.
The @avyaordv is probably a reminiscence of Ps. viii, i, 8, os Qavpacrov 76 dvofia. cov ev mdon TH yh and of Deut. xxviii, 58. Thus the Didache gives a free and condensed version of the Septuagint, not an accurate quotation.
In the second case the Didache follows the Septuagint by putting the sentence in the third and not the second person.
It also shortens the original by omitting '' my God."
In the next two cases quoted above it will be seen that the Didache uses quotations or reminiscences found originally in Barnabas.
They are due to Barnabas, not the Didache.
In III, 8 the Didache adds 6a zavrés, found also in the Fides Nicena, Syntagma Doctrine, Didascalia, Apostolic
Church Ordey and the Latin Didache.
They have thus evidently had the Greek Didache before them.
With regard to number 4 the passage in Deuteronomy is quoted in Rev. xxii, 18,19.
It may be that Barnabas quotes the words from that place, but he is closer to the Old Testament phrase.
In 5 and 6 the Didache makes additions to the material he derives from Barnabas.
With regard to 5, either the Psalm or the Sermon on the Mount may be the source, but in view of what the Didache uses from the Sermon in I, 3-6, it seems likely that the Sermon is the source here.
In 6 the negative form of the Golden Rule is said by Armitage Robinson to be derived from the Western Text of Acts xv, 20,? used by Irenzus, Cyprian and Eusebius, by others to come
1 It is not correct to say that the Didache agrees with the Targum here, as does K. Lake in New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers.
The Targum runs, "' For from the rising of the sun and even to his setting great is my name among the peoples; and whenever ye do my pleasure I will receive your prayer, and my name will be sanctified upon your hands by reason of you, and your prayers shall be as a clean offering before me: for great is my name among the peoples, saith Jehovah of Sabaoth."
2 Streeter, P.C., p. 146, note, says that there must be some connection between the Didache and the form in which the Apostolic Decree appeared in the Western Text.
The Didascalia, he says, makes this connection quite clear.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
from the apocryphal writings quoted above.
It will be seen that the order of the words follows very closely that found in the positive Golden Rule in Matt. viii, 12.
This seems to me the true source, changed into the negative, like the Jewish form of the rule, to conceal the borrowing.
In 7 it seems that the unusual form of the Didache may be due to the Psalmist's words, but, as we saw above (p.
64), it is more likely that in finding a word to go before Tov Swwkdvrwv the writer chose vnorevere because of thefamiliar combination of prayer and fasting in the New Testament.
In 8 it is likely that the Didache changed from Barnabas's "light " and '"' darkness' to " life' and "' death "' because of the words of our Lord found in Matthew.
Our Lord may have chosen them because of Jeremiah's parable and that found in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
Matthew was certainly earlier than the writer of the Didache, and so is the more probable source of his words here.
In 9 and ro the Didache uses what may be quotations in Barnabas.
The writer makes no alteration in 9, but in 10 he brings together two clauses of Barnabas, and the result is a very close parallel to Deut. i, 16-17.
He may have brought the two clauses together merely because the subjects are similar, or because of the Deuteronomy passage.
We cannot be certain about that.
With regard to 11 and 12, it will be seen that Barnabas is the author of the reminiscences, if they are reminiscences, of the Old Testament.
The Didache merely adopts them as they are.
In 13 and 14 it will be seen that besides the Old Testament source there may be a source in the New Testament.
For example, in Acts iv, 24 we read, '' O Lord, thou that didst make the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that in them is," and this passage is used elsewhere in the prayers of Did. IX and X.
It seems more likely that this is the source of Did. X, 3, and the Matthew passage the source of Did. XII, 1, especially as in X, 6 the Didache uses the " Hosannah " from this Matthean passage.
In numbers I5 and 16 any connection with the Old Testament 1s very doubtful.
The xara TH evtoAjv is a favourite
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
word of the writer of the Didache, and what it refers to here we cannot tell.
It may be a vague reference to Old Testament laws about tithes, first-fruits, etc.
In 16, Aaron was the great high priest, and he was Moses' prophet.
This may explain the Didache's calling prophets " your high-priests,"' but other explanations of the passage will be found in the chapter on the Didache's ministry.
It will be seen that the Didache makes remarkably little use of the Old Testament.
Where it does use any passage, it uses it very freely and with considerable variation.
It is very difficult to see how people can call it more Jewish in tone than other Christian writings when it uses the Old
Testament so much less.
(b) The New Testament Opinions vary considerably on the question as to how much use, if any, the Didache makes of the New Testament.
If we consider how " very allusive '' is Hermas's method of quotation from the Scriptures, and how peculiar are Justin's methods of quoting the Gospels, we will not expect to find in the Didache explicit and exact quotations, but will accept as evidence of the Didache's knowledge of the Scriptures mere reminiscences of New Testament thought and language.
Sanday, in the Gospels in the Second Century, said that '' we are struck at once by the small amount of exact coincidence
(in second-century quotations), which is considerably less than that which is found in the quotations from the Old
Testament.'
Often this phenomenon is explained by saying that the words of the New Testament were transmitted chiefly by oral tradition, and so were quoted from memory.
Papias, we know, was interested not so much in the written word as in the " living words of tradition.""
The " Formgeschichte " school of New Testament criticism is teaching us to give more weight to the power of oral tradition than the criticism of the older schools would allow.
There are, however, many signs that the written word was greatly prized and widely circulated in the second century.
Marcion, we know, had a written Gospel according to S. Luke, expurgated so as not to contradict the heresiarch's teaching.
Papias
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
may have been interested in the " living words of tradition," but he gathered up all the traditions he could about the writing of Gospels.
Heracleon, at an early date, wrote a commentary on the Fourth Gospel.
Tatian, we know, knew just our four written Gospels; he knew how difficult it was to make them agree together and so he wrote his harmony
' quattuor evangelistarum in unum opus dicta compingens, "' even daring to "' paraphrase the Apostle.''
Irenezus knew the written four-fold Gospel.
Origen was the first textual critic of the New Testament.
The Gospel of Peter, a secondcentury work, was not a harmony nor a gospel incorporating new material, it was a new Gospel based upon merely what we have in our four canonical works.
In the Muratorian Canon we have discussions as to the writing of the New Testament Scriptures.
Moreover, we have such MSS. of the Scriptures as the Chester Beatty Papyri, which go back to a very early date.
The Scillitan Martyrs, even though they were poor people, possessed copies of the Pauline writings at an early date.
Even so, in the midst of all this, Justin can be curiously inaccurate and vague in his use of the New Testament.
Some suppose that he used a harmony.
In his letter to Carpanus Eusebius said that Ammonius wrote a harmony like Tatian, while in Die Abendmahlsfrage in ihrer geschichtliche Entwicklung, K. Goetz says, " In dieser Zeit des festeren
Zusammenschlusses des N.T. Kanons war zu derartigen Ausgleiche der verschiedenen N.T. Uberlieferungen der starkste Antrieb vorhanden."
Justin may have made such a harmony in his own mind or written one to use.
This may be the explanation of his vague quotations, as it is of those we make nowadays, even though we know the Gospels so well, Finally, the question of the canonicity of the New Testament at any period has to be decided.
S. Paul in I Tim. v, 18 quotes from the words of Jesus as though they were canonical scripture.
In Barn. IV, 14, we find a Gospel quotation introduced by the usual formula for a quotation from a canonical source.
In a.p. 177 in c. 32 of his work Athenagoras of Athens uses the same formula for quotations
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
from the New and the Old Testaments.
This is about the time when Tatian and Heracleon and Irenzus were writing, when the Scillitan martyrdoms took place, when the Muratorianum was written.
Not much later, Melito of Sardis wrote of 7 7aAaa duaOyKn, which implies a d:aOynn Kawy.
At this period, when the Gnostics were bringing out their secret traditions and apocryphal gospels, the Catholic Church had to consolidate its apostolic heritage.
So we see, as Dobschiitz says.in Probleme d. a.Z., p. 115, that at this period we find "statt Herr, die Evangelien; statt Apostel, deren Briefe; statt des Geistes, der Buchstabe."'
This was, however, the final stage of a long history of gradual canonisation.
The first Christian writings were ordinary letters or histories or sermons.
Gradually the Church selected some, and these gradually gained the position of canonical writings.
It might therefore be possible to quote these writings before they reached a position of full canonicity with little respect.
This is what we often find.
Afterwards it is evident that the canonical writings are so studied and read that their
'words and ideas permeate Christian writing, even if they are not explicitly quoted.
If we now examine the Didache chapter by chapter, it will be seen how great a portion of its language, if not of its subject-matter, is founded upon the New Testament Scriptures.
We will first deal with chapters VI-XVI, as so much of the '' Two Ways "' is derived from Barnabas, and the problems there are slightly different.
Didache, chapter VI. i. dpa pH Tis ce tAavyHon amo TavTns THs 6d00 Tis drdayqs.
Matt. xxiv, 4.
Bdrémere uy Tis buds TAavHoN.
I John iii, 7. rexvia, wndels mAavdtw buds.
II Pet. ii, 15.
KataAelmovres ed0etav Odov émAavyOnoav. ii. ef pev yap Svvacar Baordcat dAov tov Cvyov rob
Kuplov TéAcLos €o7.
Matt. xi, 29, 30. dpare rov Luydv pou ef' buds .
Acts Xv, 10,11. vév odv ri meipdlere Tov Oedv, émiBetvar luyov emt tov Tpaxnrov Tv palynTav ..
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
Matt. v, 48. éceobe odv tpeis réAevon .
. XIX, 21. Ei | Oddeus TéXetos cfvas .
Phil. iii, 15. dc01 ody TéAevou .
. ii. ef 8° od Sdvacat, 6 SUvyn, TOOTO ToleL.
A similar double standard is found in I Cor. vii. iii. mepi 5€ rHs Bpdoews ..
. dd 5€ Tob EldwdoBdTov Alav mpocexe.
I Cor. viii, 4. rept 8€ ris Bpdoews obv TAv cidwAobdrwv.
| The Didache does not, however, follow Paul's | teaching.
Acts xv, 28,29. d0€ yap 76 'Ayiw Ivetpare Kat piv | pndev mréov emribecbar duiv Bapos mAnv tov endvayKes Tovtwv, améxecbar eldwrofdTwr Kal atpatos |
Kal mvukt@v Kat mopvetas.
Cf. Acts xxi, 25. lii. Aatpeia ydp éote Oedv vexpav.
I Thess. i, 9.
Kal 7@s ezeotpéate mpos tov Beov amo TOV ciowrAwv, Sovdretew Bed CHvre kai adnfw.
In this chapter it will be seen that the greater part of it | in subject-matter and language may be derived from) the New Testament.
The use of II Pet. 1, 15 in VI, I may be doubtful, but a sufficiently probable source may be found in the Didache's own reference to a "' Way of Life" and to " Teaching " combined with Matt. xxiv, 4 and I John | ili, 7.
Did., chapter VII. i. mept d€ rod Banticpartos.
I Cor. vii, 1. epi d€ dv éeyparate pou, vii, 25, Vili, Lode rete TAUTA TAVTO
MPOELTOVTES,
Bantiocate ets TO dvoma Tob maTpos Kal Tod viod Kal Tod aylov mvevpatos ev voaTt COvte.
Matt. xxviii, I9, 20. aopevOévtes obv pabyrevoate TavTa, TO ebvn, Pazrrilovres attovs eis 76 dvopia TOO
Ilatpds kal rot Yiod Kai rob 'Ayiov IIvevpatos, duddoKovtes avtovs TNpEv TAVTO 6oa evererAdunv dptv.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
John iv, HO; tas Kal EOWKEV GV Got vdwp Cav .
. 700ev ovv €xets TO VOwp TO Lav...
John vii, 38. orapol .
. vdatos Cévtos. iii. Matt. xxviii, I9.
Compare the title of the Didache: Aday7 Kupiov dia TOV dWoEKA aTOOTOAWY Tots Ebveow.
In this chapter we may note that the Didache derives its baptismal formula from the end of Matthew, and that it
, considers its "' Two Ways "' to be the pre-baptismal instruction which the Lord ordered the Eleven! to give to the Gentiles.
Its title and formula are evidently derived from this Gospel.
'" Running water "' is ordered for baptism in the Canons of Hippolytus and the Egyptian Church Order, and a parallel is found in the Szbyllines.
The source in the Didache may be the Johannine passages.
The Trinitarian formula used here is not usedin IX, 5.
Itissaid to be later than "to be baptised into the name of the Lord"' which may be the Pauline formula.
The pre-baptismal fast was the universal custom from the time of Justin onwards.
To order others to join in is less usual.
Did., chapter VIII. i. At S€ vnoretar tudv py €oTwoav peta TaV
UTOKPLTOD.
Matt. vi, 16.
"Orav d€ vyoretnre, pn yivecbe, ws ot dmoKkpital, oxvOpwrot: e A \ , buets d€ vnotevoaTe.
Se : s Mark ii, 20. éAevoovrar 5é Ayepar orav amapOHR am'
" an , A / A avTta@v 6 vudios, Kal TOTE vnoTEevGoVOW eV EKEelvyn TH ¢€ , pepe:
TAPATKEVHV.
Matt. xxvii, 62; Mark xv, 42; Luke xxili, 54; John xix, I4, 31, 42 of the Preparation for the Passover.
In Mark xv, 42 mapacKevy 6 €ore mpoodbBatay 1 The reference in Matthew is, of course, to the Eleve
" Twelve '"' is always what Paul refers to, and Twelve Ap ideal of the Apocalypse.
So the Didache can be called th¢ Twelve Apostles.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
ii. pnde mpooedxe abe Ws ot bmoKpiral.
Matt. vi, 5.
Kal drav mpocedynabe ovK éaeobe ws ot jmoKpitat.
GAN? ds exéAevoev 6 KUptos ev TO edayyedio adTob ovTwW Tpocedxeabe.
Matt. vi, 9. ovrws odv mpocedyeobe tpeis.
Didache.
Matt. vi, 9-13 Ilarep pay, 6 ev T@ otvpav@, Ilarep Pav, 6 ev Tots ovpavots, ayacOnre TO Ovo"d TOU ayracOnra TO OVOLLa TOU, eNérw 1) Baorcia gov, eAbérw 7 Baorcia gov: yern jroo TO edna gov ws yer Ojro TO BeAnpd cou ws év ovpav@ Kat emt vis' TOV ev ovpave, Kal emt yas" TOV diprov pav TOV €movavov dpTov 7pav TOV émovavov dos 7 jply OnLEpov, Kal ages dos mpi O7nLEpov"
Kal ages jpty THY dperdry UV, jpy Ta dpednpara 7pav, ws Kal Tpets dplewev To ts ws Kal types aprjKapev Tots dpeiderais 7 par, Kat #7) ddeirerats 1) 7pavka p27) eloeveyKns Has els eloeveyKns pas eis TELpAoHOv, aAAd pioar jas Tetpacpov, GAAa pica Huds amo Tob movynpod: a0 TOD Trovnpod.
@ ~ ha e , \ e , > AY 6Tt ood €oti % SUvapts Kat 7 Sd€a Els ToOvS al@vas.
Matt. vi, 13.
In the doxology of the Lord's prayer the Sahidic version alone has dvvayus Kai dd6€a without 7 Baoweia.
Matt. xviii, 32.
AodAe movnpé, maoav thv ddecdyv exelvnv a¢hkd oot.
35. ovTw Kal 6 TATHpP ov oO €7roupavios , eon 2h Na Sug ae ¢ es) a Toujoe. viv, eav py adfnre Exaotos TH adeAd@ adTob amd TOv Kapdidv bdr.
From the New Testament passages quoted above it will be evident whence the Didache has derived the greater part of itschapter VIII.
It will be seen that the doxpirai of the ospels are a certain type of Jew, those of the Didache are
Jews.
The writer of the Didache knows from what he oing on around him that all Jews fast on Monday and , so he finds a reason for the Wednesday and istian fasts, which are compulsory among his comDidache's Lord's Prayer is almost the same
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
-as that of Matthew.
There are only three differences :
Thv opetAny for Ta dfetAjuata ; €v TH ovpav® for ev tots odpavois ; adicwev for adyjxopev. The first and last of these are probably due to Matt. xviii, 32, 35, where similar matter occurs.
Whence the Didache derives its command that the Lord's Prayer must be said three times daily we cannot tell.
It may be that the writer knows the three '' Canonical Hours "' and how the various times of prayer at the third, sixth and ninth hour are mentioned in Scripture, and so calls it an evangelical custom.
Some say that here we have evidence of the Jewish origin of the Didache, the Lord's
Prayer being substituted for the '' Amidah" which is said three times daily.
It is likely that the Didache was written at a time when the Canonical Hours were already known, as they are in Hippolytus's Church Order, and the writer knows how often they occur in Scripture.
That would be sufficient source for him.
Did., chapter IX. i. wept d€ THs edyaptorias.
Cl Did wy IS ee VIE Or 1 Coro vii 1, 25) Vilis 1, Si; 6. mept dé .
. ii. mp@rov wept rob mornpiov. motypiov used in all accounts of the Last Supper.
The order Cup-Bread is found in Luke xxii, 17 ff.
(Western text); I Cor. x, 16. bmép THs aylas auméAov Aavetd rob matdds cov.
John xv, 1.
"Eyed ety 4 dyrredos 4) GAN Ow.
Rev. v, 5. 7 pila AaBis.
Matt. xxi.
Parable of God's vineyard.
The Jews are God's vineyard.
Aaveltd 706 matdds cov...
*Incot rob maids cov.
Acts iv, 25.
AaBid adds cov.
27. maida cov Inoodv. ili. wept 5€ tot KAdoparos.
KkAdopa used in Matt. xiv, 20, xv, 37; Mark vi, 43, viii, 8, 19,20; John vi, 12, 13; Luke ix, 17, all accounts of the Miraculous Feedings.
JHE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
tmép THs Cwhs Kal yywocews.
Cw and yrdous are the themes of John vi, xvii. iv. @omep Hv tottro TO KAdopa SiecKopmicpévov émdvw Tv dpéwyv Kal avvaxbev eyéveto ev, ottTw avvaxyOyntw cov % exKAnoia amo TOV TEpaTwv THS yHs els THY anv Bactrelav.
John xi, 52.
Kal ody brép Tob EOvous pdvov, aAN' iva Kat 7a. TEKva TOO Meod Ta SveckopmLapEeva ouvayayn Ets EV.
Matt. xxiv, 31.
Kal émovvd€ovat tods éexAeKrovs adrod ex TOV Tecodpwy aveuwv am dKpwv obpavdv ews aKkpav avTav.
Matt. xviii, 12.
A reference to the sheep wandering él Ta, Opn.
A A \ , "
€ x A Vv. kal yap mept tovTov etpynKkev
KUptos.
My d@Te TO aytov Tots Kvat. se ~ A / Matt. vii, 6. M7 d@7e 70 dyov Tots Kvot.
Though it is said that this chapter is derived from Jewish prayers, it will be seen that much is found in the New
Testament. €w7 and yvdos are not found in John, but the verbs are found there.
What the " Holy Vine of David "' is we cannot tell; it is not made clear in the Didache, which probably quotes the New Testament without explaining it.
In section v the forbidding of communion to anyone except the baptised is a more than evangelical law, but it may be derived from the Pauline demand that we must partake of the elements worthily. .We may note that we have in Did. IX, 5 0f Barricbévres eis 6vopa Kupiov, as we do in Rom. vi, 3 and Acts viii, 16.
Did., chapter X. i. Mera S€ 76 eumAnobjvac.
John vi, 12. ds 8€ everAjobyaav.
I Cor. xi, 25. woatrws Kal Td moripiov peta TO deumvijoar. pes e A A € li ll. Umep TOO aylov dvdmatds Gov ob KaTeacKkHvwoas
> Cal ~ ev Tats Kapdiats Ua.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
mae John xvii, 26. éyvwpica adrois 76 vod cov.
Cf. John Xvli, passim and in O.T. Deut. xii, 11, ". shall choose to cause his name to dwell there."
John i, 14.
Kat 6 Adyos .
. eoxnjvwcev ev hiv. bméep THs yvwoews Kal mloTews Kal aOavacias.
II Tim. i, 10.
¢wricavtos € CwHv Kal adbapoiav Sa Tob evayyediov.
. lil. ov, S€o070Ta TavToKpaTop, exTLoas Ta TaVTA
EVEKEV TOD OVOM"ATOS Gov.
Acts iv, 24.
Aéemota, od 6 moijcas tov odpavov Kat THY yhv Kal THY OdAacoay Kal mavTa Ta év avdTois.
Rev. vi, 10...
. 6 deamdtys 6 dytos Kal aAnOwwos.
Rev. iv, II.
67 ov eKTLoas TO TAVTO.
Eph. ii, 9.
@€@ 7 ta mavra Krioarte.
Rev. i, 8, iv,8,etc. mavroxpdtwp, and in II Cor. vi. 18.
Rom. i. 5. dep tod dvdpuatos adroo.
John xii. 28, "Father, glorify thy name." tpodnv Te Kal moTtov €dmKas Tots avOpwmmots eis amoAavowy iva aot edxyaptoTnowotr.
I Tim. vi, 17.
GA emi 0e@ TH mapexyovte jytvy mavra mAovoiws eis amdXdavow.
I Tim. iv, 4.
67 wav xriopa Meod Kadov, .
. peta evyaptotias AapBavopevov.
I Tim. iv, 3.
. améyeo8ar Bowydrwv a 6 Veds Exticev els petaAnypw peta edyapiotias Tois moots. npty dé exapiow mvevpatiKny Tpodyv Kat ToTOV
Kal Cwrv aiwviov.
I Cor. x, 3, 4. mwavres 70. adto BodSpa mvevpaticov épayov, Kal mavTes TO adTO TOMA TVEVLATLKOV ETLOV.
John vi, 54.
6 tpwywr pov THY odpKa Kal Tivwy ov TO aiwa exer Cwv aidwov.
Cf. John vi, passim. re Bread of Life. iv. mpo mavrwv edxyaptotobpmev cot, ore Suvaros ef.
Luke i, 49. émoinod pou peydda 6 duvaros. v. pvyioOnrs, KUpte, THS exKAnolas cov, Tod pioacBat adTyyv amo TavTos Tovnpod Kal TeACLBoat avrTny év TH ayamn cov, kal cvvatov adTHy amo
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
TOV TEecodpwv avéuwv, THY aytacbetoar, ets THv onv Baotdeiav, Hv Hroiwacas avr.
Cf. Matt. xxiv, 31 on IX, 4 above. ptvoacbat adtiyv amo TmavTos Tovypod.
The Lord's Prayer.
John xvii, 15. ov« eépwrd wa dpns adrovs ex Tob Kdopov aGAd' iva typyons ek Tod Trovnpou.
Kal TeAet@oar adTyy ev TH aya Gov.
John xvii, 23. wa dou rereActwpevor eis ev.
I John iv, 18.
6 d€ doBovpevos od tereActwrar ev TH aydrn.
Heb. x, 1.
Sacrifices od dvvavtat tods mpocepyopevous Tederoat.
THV aytacbetoar.
Heb. x, 10.
& & OeAjuate yracpévor eopev Sia ris mpoogopas Tod awuatos, 'Incod Xpiotod.
Eph. v, 26, wa adriy (rHv éxxdAnoiav) ayudon ..
. els THY Bactrelav Hv HTroipacas atbTH.
Matt. xxv, 34.
K«Anpovopjoare riv Arowacpevyy byiv Baoureiav.
Heb. xi, 16.
#rotpace yap (6 beds) adrots méduv. vi. €AGerw yxdpis Kal mapeAPérw 6 Kdapos odTOS.
I Cor. vii, 31. mapdyer yap To oyqua rob Kéopov Tovrov.
'Qoavva 7H Oe@ Aaveis.
Matt. xxi, 9, 15 and parallel passages.
'Qoawd 7 vid AaBis. et tis dytds eativ, epxyécdw. et Tis odK att, HeTavocitw' papav abd.
I Cor. xvi, 22.
«i tus od pide? tov Kupuov, Arw avdbepa.
Mapav aa. anv.
I Cor. xiv, 16. eet dav eddoyis mvevpare .
. mds OS a nN \ A aA Epel TO apn emt TY 92) evyaploria.
Vii. tots 8€ mpodytats emitpéemete edyaptorety dca O€Aovowr. ee é I Cor. xiv, 16; cf. above.
: THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
Acts xiii, I, 2.
"Hoap d€ ev 'Avrioyeia .
. mpodtjrat Kat dwddoKado.
. Aeitoupyovvrwy dé abtav TH Kupiw .
These two chapters, IX and X, will be more fully discussed when we come to the question of the Didache's agape and eucharist.
It may, however, be pointed out here that, although it is said that these chapters are derived from Jewish prayers, there are numerous parallels with passages found in the New Testament.
What is especially noticeable are the reminiscences of the Johannine writings, of Hebrews and Ephesians.
Greiff is alone in thinking that " John "' made use of the Didache.1_Those who think the Didache was written c. A.D. 100, about the same time as the Fourth
Gospel, hold that the similarity of language implies one place of origin for both works.
It is not likely, however, that the Didache was written at Ephesus.
Since the Didache uses so much of the rest of the New Testament, it is probable that it uses the Johannine writings here.
Did., chapter XI. i,ii.
"Os dv odv eAOdv SiddEn tyads TabTa TavrTa A / v4 > / ie aN ) A b} A Ta mpoeipnpeva, SéEaabe adtov' éav de adTos 6 SiddoKkwy otrpadets S1ddoKy dAAnY Sidaxnv eis TO Katadtoa, p17 avdtTob aKkovonte. w~ A A / > wn II John, 9, 10. was 6 mpodywv Kat pn pévwy ev TH wa ~ lot "
¢ vA > a diudayh Tob Xpiorod @eov odK exer'
O pevwr Ev TH ~ if By SiSayH, oOTOS Kal TOV TAaTEepa Kal TOV ViOV EXEL EL TIS aA AY , pyerau mpos vpds, Kal tavryv THY didayny od péper,
A Vd ~ py AapBavere avrov ets oiKiav, Kal yaipew adT@ pr A€yere.
Katadtoar.
Gal. ii, 18.
«f yap & karéAvoa tabra médw oikodopd.
Sééacbe adrov ws KUptov.
Matt. x, 40.
6 dexdpevos duds ene Séxerar.
II John 10.
See above.
John xiii, 20.
6 AapBdvev édv twa Téppw eye AapBaver.
1 Das dlteste Pascharituale, etc., Johannine Studies.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
wes '
A \ oe , \ ~ 111.
TIE Pl de TWV aTrooToAwy Kat Tpodyntav.
Eph. ii, 20. em 7® OepeAiw radv dmoorddAwy Kat mpopntav, \ \ / ~ > / KaTQA TO doypa TOV evayyediov.
Cf. Matt. x, when Twelve were sent out, and parallel passages ; Luke x, when the Seventy were sent out.
~ A > , > / '
¢€ ~ f iv. mas 5€ amdatodos epxdpevos mpos tyads SexOnTw ws KUpLoS.
Matt. x, 40; cf. above. v. od pevet dé <ei w7)> Huepav play, etc. vi. e€epxdpevos S€ 6 amdatoAos pydev AapBaverw ef
1 aptov, €ws ob adrAvcbA. eav dé apyvprov aith, pevdompodyrns éeortt.
Matt. x, 9. py KrHocabe ypuady pndé dpyvpov .
. and parallel passages.
Matt. vii, 15.
... pevdompodytav ..
. €owlev eiar AvKo. dpTrayes.
Vil. Kal mdvra mpodyrnv AadrodvTa év mvedpare od meipadcete ovd€ Staxpiveite: aoa yap duaptia adeOnoetar, atrn Sé % dpapria od« ageOrnoerac.
Matt. xii, 31.
68a rodro Adyw suiv, méca dpuapria kat PAracgdypia ddeOjoetar trois dvOpdmous:
% Sé 70d Ivevpatos BAacdypia odk adebjoera.
I Cor. xiv, 29. mpodiras 8¢ Sv0 % pets Aadclrwoar, Kal ot dAdou Siakpwéerwoayr.
I John iv, I. pa mavti mvedpatt morevere, aAdAd Soxiudlere Ta TvevpaTa.
I Thess. v, 20, 21. mpodnytetas pi) e€ovbevetre, mdvra doxiudlere.
Vill. od mG@s S€ 6 AaAdy ev mvevpare Tpogpytns eativ, add' é€av éxn tods tpdmovs Kuplov. amo ody TOV tTpoTwv yvwobjcetar 6 pevdorpodyrys Kal 6 mpodyrns.
Matt. xii, 33.
€« ydp rod Kapmod 76 dév8pov ywoaoxerar.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
Matt. vil, 16. dno t&év Kaprav abrdv émyvdcecbe Ady avrous. iX. Kal mas mpopy7 ns: opilwy Tpdme lav €v mvevpare od payerat am' adris, et 8€ unye pevdompoPHnTHS €oTl,
II Pet. ii, 13. evrpuddvres ev tats daydmas adrav ovvevwYovpevot Duty.
Jude 12. ob7ot ciow of év tats dydrats budv omaAdses,
OVVEVWYOULLEVOL.
I Cor. xiv; see on Did. X,.7.
Tpdmela for ayday as we hear of " serving tables " in Acts vi.
X. was b€ mpodyrns. SiddoKwy tiv adynberav, ef & d1ddoKet od Tovet, pevdorpodyrns €ort.
Matt. v, 19. és éav ody Avon pilav TeV evroAdv TovTwV Kat didd€n otrw .
. ds 8 dv roujon Kal diddy.
Matt. xxiii, 3.
A€yovor yap Kal od Trovodar.
Xl. els puoTHpioyvy KoopLKoOV.
Eph. v, 31, of marriage and Church, 70 pvornpiov TobTO péya €oriv. xii.
Gf Did. X1)6:
Asking for money for others, compare Paul and Barnabas collecting to relieve famine foretold by Agabus.
Did., chapter XII. i. was 5é 6 epxdpevos ev dvopmate Kupiov dexOyTw.
Mark xiii, 6. Many shallcomein myname... and lead many astray.
Matt. xxi, 9 and parallels edAoynévos 6 epyduevos ev ovopatt kupiovu.
John v, 43.
I came in the name of my father and ye received me not; but if anyone else comes in his own name, him ye will receive.
Matt. xviii, 5; Mark ix, 37; Luke iv, 48.
6s dv &v rv mardtwv TovTwy SéEynTat emi TH dvopaTti pov...
III John 10.
Avozpedrjs odk émiddxetar Has.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
Soxtpadoavtes adrov yuvwaeabe ..
II John 7,8.
Many deceivers have gone out into the world .
. look to yourselves that ye lose not the things which we have wrought. avveow yap. é€ere Seay Kai aprorepav.
II Cor. vi,7.
81a rv dtAwy Tis SiKaocdyyns THv SeEvav Kal apiorepov.
Col. i, 9. wa mAnpwhfre ... ev mdon aodia Kal
OUVEGEL TIVEVPLATLK}.
ili. éepyaléodw kai dayétw.
II Thess. iii,10. e¢t res od OdAer epydleabar, pyde eobiéTw.
| iv. xptotiaves.
Occurs in Acts xi, 26, xxvi, 28; I Pet. iv, 16.
Did., chapter XIII. i. dEtds Cote. THS TPOPHS avTod.
Matt. x, 10. dé&vos yap 6 épydrns tis Tpodhs adrod.
Luke x, 7. puobod.
I Tim. v, 17, 18.
Quotes Matt. and I Cor. ix, 9. i. mpodnryns. ii. deddcKados found in Acts xiii, I, quoted above on Did. x, 7.
These three chapters of the Didache are more fully discussed in the chapter on the ministry in the Didache.
It will be seen that they make use of a great deal of the New Testament.
There are not so many reminiscences of the language of the New Testament, but it will be pointed out later how much of the subject-matter is derived from the New Testament.
We may note especially that Jude is the probable source of Did. XI, 9, and that the smaller Johannine epistles are employed.
Did., chapter XIV. i. KaTa KUpLaKyy.
Rev. i, 10.
& TH Kupiakh jepa. ouvaxdévres KAdoaTte apTov.
Acts xx, 7. ev d€ TH pid t&v caBBdtwr, ovvnypévwv quav KAdoat aptov.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
mpoeEomorAoynodpevoe TA TapamTampata bdr, omws Kalapa % Ovoia buav 7.
Matt. v, 23, 24. édv obv mpoaddpns 7d Sdpov cov emi rd Ovovacrypiov, KaKket pvnobis drt 6 adeAdds cov exe TL KaTa God, ddes exet TO SMpov aov eumpocbev
Tod Qvovacrnpiov, Kal vmaye, mpOrov diadAdyyOe T@ AdeAPH aov, Kal tote EAD@v mpdadepe TO SHpdv
Gov.
James v, 16. eopuodroyetobe adAjAots Tas daprtias. ii.
This section is certainly derived from Matt. v, 23, 24, and from Matt. xviii, 15 ff.,esp. éav d€ Kai ris éxxAnatas mapakovon €oTw co womrep 6 eOviKos Kal 6 TeAwWVNs.
This chapter XIV of the Didache is almost completely derived from the New Testament, and from the one passage in the Old Testament, Malachii, 11, 14.
In the chapter on the Didache's eucharist it will be shown how it would be possible for the writer to have learnt from Biblical sources that the eucharist is a @vota.
Did., chapter XV. i. yetporovncate ovv.
Acts xiv, 23. yelpotovncavres dé adtois mpeoBurépous. é€miakomous Kal Stakdvous.
In I Tim. iii no reference is found to zpeoBurepou, only to émioxomot Kal didKovot.
In Tit. i, Titus is to set up mpeoBurépous of a certain type, Se? yap tov éicxomov .
. elvat.
In Phil. i, 1, Paul addresses himself to the bishops and deacons.
Sars adirapytpous, SeSoxipacpevous. adiAdpyupos of bishop in I Tim. 111, 3.
I Tim. iii, 10, of deacons, Kat ob7ot 5€é Soxwysalécbwoay. aéiovs Tod Kupiov.
Matt. x, 37, 38. ovdK dort pov ats. mpaets.
Bishop in I Tim. iii, 3, must be eave.
Nevroupylav trav mpogynt@v Kai Sidackddrwv.
Cf. Acts xiii, 1, 2, quoted on Did. X, 7.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
ii. of reTuunpevor Dwav.
| I Tim. v, 17. of Kadds mpoeor@res mpeoBirepor Sumdifjs tins a€vovcdwaoar. py omeplonte.
Heb. xiii, 7.
Mvnpovevere t&v jyoupévw byav.
I Thess. v, 12.
€idSévar rods Kom@vras ev dyiv Kal mpovorapevous tucav ev Kupi@d .
. ae ii, 15. pendeis cov mrepippoveitw.
"Edéyxere de GAA AoUs pen ev opyh, aAd' ev e(pqvn Ws éxeTe ev TO edayyedio.
Kal mavrt aoroxotvTt Kata Tob Etépov pndets Aadeitw pndé map' budv axovétw, Ews ob peTtavojnon.
Matt. v, 22-6, quoted above.
Matt. xvili, 15-35.
I Tim. v, 20. tods dpaptavovras évaimov mdavTwv édeyye ss II Tim. iv, 2.
€deyéov, émitiwnoov, mapaxdAecov ev maon paKpoOupia Kai dday7.
Tit. i, 9. iva duvares 7 kat rapakaretv ev 7H SidacKkaXia Th vyvawovon Kat Tods avTivdyovtas eAdyyxeww.
The most noticeable thing in this chapter is the use made of Matthew and of the Pastoral Epistles.
The whole of the chapter could be derived from these sources.
Did., chapter XVI. i. ypnyopetre brep THs Cwis tudv. of Adyvor Sav py oBecbntwoar, Kat ai dadves tudv py exAvéacbwoav, adrdAa yiveobe Erotpot: od yap otdate TV wpav é€v H 6 KUpLos AuUdv " épxeTa.
Matt. xxiv, 42. ypnyopeire obv, ote odK oldaTe mola NMEpa. 6 KUpLos Budv epyeTar.
Luke xii, 35.
""Eorwoav tydv ai dadves mepteCwopevar, Kat of A¥xVoL KaLOpEVOL.
Luke xii, 40. \ ort % wpa ov Soxeite 6 vids TOO Matt. xxiv, 44. avOpamov epyerau.
Matt. xxv, 13. ypnyopetre ody 6rt odk OldaTe THY HLEpay ovd€ THY Wpav.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
ee ii. €v 71@ é€oxdtw Kkatp@. Barnabas has avouw Kaipd.
I Thess. v, I. epi d€ t&v xpdvwv Kal TOV Kaipdv.
€oxdTy 7wepa common in John. eoxatat yuepor Acts ii, 17, II Tim. iii, 1, James v, 3. iii. €v yap tats €oxdtats yuepats mANOvVOHncovTar ot wevdompodjtrar Kat ot ¢0opets, Kal otpagdynoovTat Ta mpdoBata ets AVKous, Kal 7 ayann oTpadnoetat eis piaos.
Matt. xxiv, II, 12.
Kal woAdoi pevdorpodfrar éyep67govrat, Kat mAavycovot moXdXovs:
Kal Suda 7d TAnIuvOAvar THY Gavopiay puynoetar 7 aydryn Tov TOMO.
Matt. xxiv, 10.
Kal tore oxavdadtabjoovrat 7oAAol, Kat ddAjAovs trapadwcovor, Kal puojcovow aAArjdovs.
Matt. vii, 15. mpooéyere amo rev pevdorrpodnTar, otrwes Epyovrar mpos buds ev evdvpuaor mpoBdtwr, écwbev dé elou AVKOL ApTrayes. iv. adéavovons yap THs avopias pronoovow GAArAovs Kal SumEovot kal mapadwaovat, Kal T6TE pavyoetat 6 KoopoTAavys ws vids Beod, Kat
ToupoeL oOnpeta Kal répata, Kal » yq mapadoOnaerat eis xetpas adtodb, Kal moinoes abéuita, & ovdéTOTE yéyovev e& aidvos.
Matt. xxiv, 10, quoted above.
Xxiv, 12, quoted above.
XXiv, 24. éyepOjcovrar yap yevddypioro.
Kal pevdormpog¢frat, Kat dwaovor onueta peydAa Kat tépata, worTe TAavfoa, ef Svvardv, Tods éxreKTous.
Ii Thess. ii, 8, 9.
Kal tore amoxadug¢Ojcerat 6 dvopos, év 6 Kupios avedet TH mvevdpare Tod orduatos adbrod.
Kal Katapynoer TH emupaveia THs Tapovalas abtod ob €oTw 7) mapovola Kat' evepyetav Tob Latava ev macy
Suvdper Kal onpelois Kat Tépacr PevSous, Kal ev don anarn adiKtas Tots aroAvpévors.
Rev. xiii, 2. kal eSwev adt@ 6 Spdkwv tiv dvvayw adrod, Kai Tov Opdvov abrod, Kat e€ovoiav peyaAnv.
Rev. xiii, 13.
Kal moet onpeta peyara..
IIO
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
II Thess. ii, 11. évépyevav mAdvys II John 7. odAoi mAdvou e€HADov eis TOV KdapOV. v. tore HEew% Krlots TOV avOpwamwy eis THY TUpwoL rhs Soxipacias, kat oxavdadtcOnaovrat moAAot
Kat amoAobvrat, of dé bropetvavtes €v TH TiaTEL adtav cwinaovrat bm adtob Tod KaTabéuaros.
Matt. xxiv, 10, quoted above.
I Cor. iii, 13-15.
% yap 7wéepa SyAdoe, Sr. ev srupi dmrokad'mrera Kal ExdoTov TO épyov Gmoidv €oTL, To Trip abro Soxysdoet. adros d€ awhyceTar, ovTw S€ ws dia rupds.
Gal. iii, 13.
°Emuardpatos mds 6 Kpepdpevos emt Evrov.
Xpiords jpas eényopacev ex THs KaTdpas TOD voLov yevopevos bTép Hudv KaTapa.
Matt. xxiv, 13, x,22; Mark xiii,13.
6 5€ dopetvas eis tédos, odTOs wOhaeTa.
Rom. i, 17; Habakkuk ii, 4.
6 d€ dtkavos ex miorews Cyoerat.
\ / , A a ~ > , vi. kal tote davycetat TA onpeta THS adAnOetas. mp@tov onpetov exmetdcews ev odpavea, elra onpetov dwvis odAmiyyos, Kal Td Tpitov avdoTacis vekpOv.
Ss ai , ,
A A Matt. xxiv, 30, 31.
Kal Tore davyoerat TO onpetov TOU A A ~ A \ viod Tob avOpustrov ev TH odpav@ Kal tote Kdyovrar méoat ai dural THs yas, Kal dpovrar Tov vidov Tov avOpustrou epydpevov emt tTHv vedeAdv tod odpavod
\ ry tA \ / a \ > A peta Suvdpews Kat SdEns modAs.
Kal amooredet '
> / ~ a Tovs ayyéAous adrod peta aodAmuyyos dwvis weyaAns, \ aA A Kal émovvdgovat Tovs eKAeKTovs avTod é€k TAY TEO4, ~ aA odpwv avepwy, am akpwv ovpavav ews dxkpwv adbrav. a NS AS a Q7/ / < > A I Cor. xv, 23,24.
€xaoros d€ év TO idiw Tdypart: amrapyy , Ww e ~ ~ ~ Xpwordés, Emerta of trod Xpiorod ev tH mapovoia
~ t nN aX eo r) } a \ Av , avtod, elra to TéAos, Stav Trapadidot THY BactAciav ~ ~ A T@ Oc@ kai warp, 6rav katapyjon ..
I Thess. iv, 16. dre adros 6 Kupios ev keAcvopart, ev pwr > te \ lot apxayyéAov, Kal ev odAmuyyt cod, KaraByoerau +3 b) ~ \ a am ovpavod:
Kat ot vexpot ev XpioT@ avacryicovrat T™pQ@Tov.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
III vii.
An Old Testament quotation.
A partial Resurrection is found in I Thessalonians quoted above.
Vili. tére deta 6 Kdopos Tov KUpLov €pXOpevov eTdvw Tov vedeAdy TOO odpavod.
Matt. xxiv, 30; Mark xiii, 26; Luke xxi, 27. dovrat Tov viov Tob avOpwrov éepxyopevov emt trav vededa@v Tod ovpavod (ev vedéAas Mark, ev vedéAn Luke).
It will be clearly seen that the Didache's Apocalypse is founded on that in Matt. xxiv, enriched from various New
Testament sources, from Barnabas and from the Old Testament.
It is very evident that here the writer is merely following the custom of all apocalyptic writers, of stringing together old materials in a new form.
Canon Streeter acknowledges the fact that the Didache is here founded chiefly on Matthew.
The other borrowings from the New Testament appear to me quite as certain.
If, then, Didache _ XVI is an artificially compiled apocalypse there is no need to refuse to admit that something has been borrowed from Barnabas.
In chapter IIIa we have seen how the Didache employs the " Two Ways" of Barnabas, and how at times he alters
Barnabas in order to obtain a quotation or reminiscence of the New Testament.
At present, then, we need only refer to passages where the Didache makes these alterations from knowledge of the New Testament or where it adds to Barnabas.
Title.
Avday7 Kvpiov 81a Tv SHbdeKa atoaToAwy Tots éOveauv. cf. Matt. xxviii, g and 20 quoted above on Did.
St oe I. i. 6801 8¥0 elol, pla ris Cwis Kal ula Tob Oavdrov, Siadopa S€ 7oAAy petakd Tdv So ddav.
Barnabas has not got the "' Ways of Life and Death."
The Didache probably derives them from Matt. vii, 13, 14.
1 680s 7 dmdyovoa eis THv ama@Acav .
. 7 680s %) drrdyovaa, eis THY Cw.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
lee ~ /, , I. ii. ap@rov adyamjoets Tov Geov Tov ToLnoarTa Ge, SevtTepov Tov TANGLOV Gov Ws GEeauTOV. oe F ; Matt. xxii, 37-39; Mark xii, 29, 31. dyamjoeis Kuptov \ / ?
Ld a yf ~ A > 5X lol tov @edv cov ev 6An TH Kapdia aod Kat ev OAN TH ~ ~ € poy cov Kal év dAn TH Siavoig cov. avdryn €oTw 7 /
> , z A ¢ , 5) ae peyddn Kal mpwrn evtoAj.
Sevtépa de opota avry 'Ayamijoets Tov mAnaiov Gov ws GeavTov.
Matthew and Mark are approximately the same, Luke goes straight on from the love of God with kat tov 7Ayotov cov ws oeavtév.
Barnabas omits the second half of the " double duty."
The Golden Rule.
See the beginning of this chapter.
I. iii.
Quoted and compared with Justin and the New Testament at the beginning of Chapter IVc.
I. iv.
Quoted and compared with the Gospels in the same place as Did. I, iii. anéxov TOV capkikO@v kal cwpatiK@y éemiOvptav.
I Pet. ii, 11.
"Ayamnrot, mapaxardd .
. aréxecbar tav capKkikav embuudv, aitwes otpatevovrar Kata THs puxfis.
Tit. ii, 12. wa dpvnodpevar tiv aoéBevav Kal Tas KoopuuKas emiOvplas cwdpdvws Kal diKaiws Kat edaeBds
Chowpev.
I. v.
Quoted on pp. 52 ff. and compared with Hermas and the New Testament.
II. vii.
Quoted on p. 37 and compared with Barnabas and Jude.
Did., chapter III, 1-6.
This is almost certainly an extract from some other writing quoted by Clement of Alexandria as Scripture.
All other cases where the Didache alters Barnabas are referred to above, and it will there be seen how much of the New Testament the Didache seems to know in this part of his writing.
The writer of the Didache has not only filled his work with verbal reminiscences of the New Testament, but often he
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
refers to the Gospel or to 4 évrodj.
In Did. VIII, 2 he says, (mpocetyeobe) cis exédevoey 6 KUpios év TH edayyeAlw adrtod, followed by the Lord's Prayer in almost exactly the same form as is found in Matthew.
In XI, 3 we are told to act kata 760 Sdéypya Tob edayyeAiov with regard to apostles and prophets, a probable reference to the words of our Lord in sending out the Twelve and the Seventy, as the subsequent material shows.
In XV, 3 it is said édéyyere .
. cis exere ev T@ evayyeAiw, a probable reference to Matt. xviii, 15-35 and v, 22-6.
In XV, 4 the writer says, ras S€ edyds dudv Kal TOS eXenpoovvas Kat TAOS Tas mpagers ouTw Tounoarte, ws
€xere ev TH edayyediw Tod Kupiov iuav.
In IX, 5 the words of Jesus as given by Matthew are introduced by kal yap epi rovrov eipnkev 6 K¥pios.
In I, 5, XIII, 7 we hear of 7) evroAy, the meaning of which has been discussed already.
We may first of all notice that the Didache uses the word evayyédov in the singular, and some have thought that this implies that the writer knew only one Gospel, either the formless ora! Gospel or else one written Gospel current in his own district, either one of our four canonical Gospels or some other, such as the Gospel according to the Hebrews.
This does not, however, follow.
Irenzeus, who certainly knew all four canonical Gospels, says, rtetpdpopdov to _ evayyéduov.
The Ps. Cyprianic adv. Aleatores says, "' The Lord says in the Gospel,'' and this document was certainly written when all four Gospels were current and well known.
Jacquier says in his Nouveau Testament dans I'Eglise Chrétienne, "" Remarquons aussi que chez les premiers écrivains chrétiens il est toujours parlé de I'Evangile au singulier, ce qui ne prouve pas qu'ils n'ont connu qu'un seul évangile.""
To-day we say that it is the Gospel according to Mark, not Mark's Gospel.
We also know the fourfold Gospel, and yet say, "The Gospel says."'
It proves nothing, then, that the Didache only uses edayyéAvov in the singular.
In his Geschichte des Neutestmentlichen Kanons, Leipoldt refers to the Didache's use of ws éyere €v TO edayyediw, and says that here we see a sign of the retreat of the personality of Jesus behind the words spoken by Him, which he considers to be the mark of canonicity of " Scripture'"' in
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
its Jewish sense.
Warfield, in Biblia Sacra, says that in Did. III, 8, IV, 1, 13, VI, 1, 2, there is unmistakably contained '' something very like a doctrine of sacred scripture."'
We have seen that in the first three of these five passages Barnabas is the real author, in VI, 1 and 2 the Didache's writer is the true source.
In these passages there is stressed a command that the words and teaching must not be tampered with.
Barnabas quotes a passage from the New Testament introduced by the words ws yéypamrat, and it is impossible to see any source of this passage except the canonical Gospel according to S. Matthew.
Barnabas is an Egyptian writing and, with Leipoldt, we must acknowledge that Egypt supplies us with our first evidence for the use of the New Testament as Holy Scripture, for it was there that the first commentators and textual critics were found.
_ Sabatier thought that the lack of exact quotations in the Didache meant that the Didache was written before any of the New Testament was written.
However, Clement of Rome quotes from the New Testament only three times, but it is evident that he knows Hebrews and I Corinthians.
Hermas quotes from one book only, that of Eldad and Modad, which is in neither the New nor the Old Testament.
Ignatius does not quote, he merely echoes and exaggerates the language of Pauland John.
Westcott says of Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians that it contains " far more references to the New Testament than any other work of the first age, and still, with one exception, all the phrases which he borrows are interwoven into the texture of his letter without any sign of quotation."
Irenzus is the first to quote exactly and by name from the New Testament, and even after his time free and loose quotations from the New
Testament Scriptures are common.
In his Bible Reading in the Early Church, Harnack shows what interest there was in the words of the Scriptures.
He refers to what Acts tells us of the Jewish converts at Bercea searching the Scriptures, he tells us how Melito composed a book of extracts from the Old Testament.
Clement of Rome said, '' Ye know the Holy Scriptures," while Barnabas commanded his people to read "' seeking out what the Lord
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
II5 commands us."
Marcion, Ptolemy and Flora, Barnabas himself and many others, Catholic and Gnostic, were so steeped in the Old Testament that its conflict with the Church's teaching immediately raised questionings.
In the face of this evidence it is very peculiar that the Didache quotes so little from the Old Testament and has so few reminiscences of its language.
Moreover, we have seen that the Didache is free with those quotations which he makes from the Old Testament.
He is not out, like Barnabas, to prove anything from the Old Testament, so he alters and adapts freely.
It will be seen in his use of Isa. Ixvi, 2 that he moulds the exact quotation from Barnabas into an evangelical context.
When the writer comes to the New Testament, he is just as free with his quotations, and the Didache is as full of "reminiscences "' as is Polycarp's Epistle.
There is no need to presume that he has different Gospels or Epistles from ours.
Harnack saw how Matthew and Luke are combined in the Didache, so he explains this by saying,
"' dass der Verfasser der Didache unter dem ' Evangelium des Herrn ' ein aus dem Lucas-Ev. bereichertes Matthaus-Evangelium vorausgesetzt und benutzt hat."'
Krawutzcky thought that the quotations in the Didache are from the Gospel according to the Hebrews, since the Didache and this Gospel are both
Ebionite in doctrine.
Others seek an explanation in supposing that the writer knew Q, which underlies the First and Third Gospels, or the lost Hebrew Logia, which Papias tells us that Matthew wrote.
None of these hypotheses are necessary.
There is no evidence for a single one of them.
All that it is necessary to suppose is that the Didache knows the four Gospels and, like Tatian, makes a harmony of them.
It uses Matthew chiefly, the most popular gospel, and Luke and John, for, as we have seen, he uses John in chapters [X and X.
Mark is, as usual, omitted.
There is little there to use, not found in the other Gospels.
It is also natural to see in the reminiscences of all the other New Testament writings mentioned in our analysis of the work a sign that the Didache knew nearly all of our New Testament, not as "oral tradition,' but as written documents.
Arnold, in
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
Zeitschrift fiir Kirchenrecht, 1885, says that " Clement of Rome tries to make Old Testament phrases his own, while the Didache lives in them.'"'
It would be possible to accept this if we replaced ''Old"' by '' New."
The Didache certainly is filled with the life and thought of the New Testament.
_ This will explain many of the problems of the Didache.
In histories of the ministry and of the eucharist we are told that the New Testament must be judged in the light of the Didache, it being assumed that the Didache is the earliest and clearest extra-canonical document to deal with these matters.
If, however, the Didache is a compilation of apostolical teaching derived from Barnabas, Hermas, the New Testament and certain other writings, it will be seen that the Didache cannot be used to explain these sources.
Rather the New Testament should be used to explain the Didache.
We have seen that from a literary point of view about the last quarter of the second century is the date when the Didache was written.
It was also about this period when the New Testament Canon began to emerge and take its place as the weapon of the Church in the hands of Irenzus against the Gnostics, apostolic scriptures being placed alongside of apostolic creeds, apostolic episcopacy and apostolic order.
The stress was on " apostolical," and there was a beginning of the writing of history.
The Muratorianum dealt with the origins of New Testament books.
Hegesippus had already travelled widely to seek out the "successions "' of the various churches.
At the turn of the century Julius Africanus wrote a history which was used by Eusebius, in which he himself made use of the Royal
Archives of Edessa.
The Paschal Controversy between Rome and the East meant a turning to tradition to see what apostles could be appealed to by each side in support of their case.
At such a period it would naturally be evident what contrast there was between the Church as portrayed in the New Testament and as it existed in contemporary fact.
Two references in Tertullian will show this clearly.
At the beginning of his De Jejunio, Tertullian claims that in his book he will deal only with what is laid down by Scripture
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
and by the tradition of the Fathers.
He adds, however, the " stationes ' and the Paschal fast.
In his De Corona, III, he says, ''Dehinc ter mergitamur amplius aliquid respondentes quam Dominus in Evangelio determinat."
A little before this time Melito of Sardis wrote a collection of proof texts for a layman from the Law and the Prophets concerning Christ, which implies that not only the clergy but also the ordinary people were interested in Scripture.
Cyprian, too, at a later date, wrote a collection of quciatons from both Testaments for " tirones."'
With the New Testament existing as a whole in the Church, it might have been possible for a historical or antiquarian mind to construct on the lines of the Didache a picture of the primitive Church.
The Leucian Acts, the Epistula Apostolorum, and the Gospel of Peter and other such antiquarian writings use the Scriptures, but ascribe to the Apostolic Church the customs of their own time.
Professor Burkitt may have been correct in his theory of an antiquarian interest aroused about A.D.
200, when James's Chair was found at Jerusalem (Eus., H.E. VII, 19, 32, 39) andthe statue of the " Woman with the Issue of Blood," but it is -not likely that the Didache is a reconstruction with no other motive.
The Didache _ seems to me to be an attempt to express in New Testament language what is common to the New Testament and other
"apostolic writings '' and to the Church at the end of the second century, especially, as we shall see, to the Montanist movement.
This will explain many of the problems of the Didache.
It will explain the prayers of Did. LX and X, which are for use at the agape or eucharist and are constructed from New
Testament prayers.
It will explain the " triad" of apostle, prophet and teacher found in Did. XI-XIII and elsewhere found only in the New Testament.
Here we can see why the prophet is so honoured, while apostle and teacher are shadowy creatures, for the prophet was honoured in the 1 Cf. Streeter, P.C., p. 147:
'' The use of the word 'apostle' may also be in part an intentional archaism .
. it would be appropriate so to phrase their injunctions as to make them seem to cover the circumstances of the Apostolic Age as well as those of the latter part of the century."
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
Church, but apostle and teacher, though honoured in the New Testament, had disappeared later.
In chapter VIII the Didache orders the Wednesday and Friday fast, a late custom, using New Testament language in a twisted way.
In chapter VII the '" primitive baptism "' is combined with the "' rabbinic '' discussion as to sorts of water to be used, with permission of clinical baptism and with the use of the Trinitarian formula.
All of this is due to a desire to find in the New Testament as much as possible about baptism, and then to expand it as much as possible.
No mention can be found in the New Testament of the universal baptismal unction and so the Didache has to omit it.
This explanation of the Didache gives us a reason why some things are introduced and some admitted.
It also explains some of the contradictions of the Didache.
The New Testament has both " baptised into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost' and "of the Lord," so has the Didache.
The New Testament has the order cup-bread at the eucharist and bread-cup, so has the Didache.
The New Testament orders that prophets be judged and also can be construed to say that the spirit of the prophets is not to be judged.
So the Didache can contradict itself.
This is, indeed, the only explanation which will make sense of the Didache—namely, that it is an attempt to express in extracts from and in the language of apostolic writings the tenets of a certain group in the Church.
We might say that it tries to show the apostolic origin of the beliefs of this sect.
In two places the Didache gives a novel exegesis of certain New Testament texts, in its use of the command "' Give not that which is holy to dogs" and of the passage about the sin against the Holy Ghost.
This latter passage is nowhere else used of prophets and of the attitude of the people to them.
In Eus., H.E. V, xviii, 8, Apollonius, while attacking Montanism, quotes Matt. xii, 33.
The Didache refers to this passage, which is part of the paragraph on sinning against the Holy Ghost.
This may be a Montanist exegesis of the passage.
In its use of Matt. vii, 6 applied to the elements at the eucharist or agape the Didache is alone among anti-Nicene writings.
THE DIDACHE AND SCRIPTURE
II9 In Lehre der zwélf Apostel, 1889, Rieks says that there is .in the Didache evidence of a knowledge of Matthew, Luke,
Acts, Revelation, Romans, Ephesians, I, II Corinthians, Colossians, Philippians, Thessalonians, I, II and III John,
I and II Peter.
Muralt stated his opinion in the Revue de Théologie et-de Philosophie in 1884 that the Didache contains reminiscences of all the books of the New Testament, quoted
" textuellement,'' except Philemon, I Thessalonians, Jude and III John.
It would be safe, I think, to say that the Didache is based on the whole of our New Testament, with the possible exception of the very late II Peter and the unimportant Mark and Philemon.
This will give us little evidence of the date of the Didache, except that it must have been written comparatively late, when all these documents were well known and widely circulated, but it does give us some idea of the object of its writer and his methods.
THE INTEGRITY OF THE DIDACHE
It has seemed best to postpone the discussion of the integrity of the Didache until now as it will be seen that several points have already emerged and must now be brought together.
It has been evident that every part of the Didache was known at a very early time, and that the Didache all through is derived from the same sources; but, even so, the integrity of the work has been seriously questioned.
It has been suggested that Did. I, 30-II, 1 and III, 1-6 were not parts of the original Didache, that Did. I-V, VI-XV and XVI were three separate documents, later combined together.
Evidence has been sought in the Stichometry of Nicephorus.
There the Didache is said to consist of two hundred orixot.
In Bryennius's MS. the Didache takes up 203 lines.
Bryennius thought that this meant that the lines of his MS. were the oriyo of Bryennius, and that his Didache was the document referred to by Nicephorus.
In the Scottish Church Review, 1884, Cotterill thought that the closeness of the numbers of lines in the MS. and of the oriyo. in Nicephorus was suspicious.
He thought that the Didache must be a forgery written later than the time of Nicephorus and "' made to measure,' as it were.
Others have thought that the two hundred oriyou of Nicephorus would represent Didache I-VI and XVI, omitting I, 30-II, 1, others that it represents the whole Didache with this one omission.
Nothing can, however, be deduced from Nicephorus's statement, for if we suppose that the oriyos was a line of constant length, the proportions in Nicephorus between the various works we know well are hopelessly inaccurate.
If a oriyos is something variable, then we cannot make any calculations.
It is also suggested that when Athanasius says that the Didache is useful for the instruction of catechumens, he can only refer to the moral teaching of the '' Two Ways."
We I20
THE INTEGRITY OF THE DIDACHE
E25 are also told that he quotes from Hermas's Shepherd as though it did not contain the Vzsions.1_
Thus his two semicanonical documents were both mutilated.
This is not true, however, at any rate of the Didache, for in the De Virginitate he quotes Did. IX.
Athanasius certainly knew the whole Didache, and it is probable that the Latin Didache and the Apostolic Church
Order did also.
As we have shown, the Afostolic Church Order has a reminiscence of the prayers of Didache IX and X and the Ps. Cyprianic adv. Aleatores quotes Did. XIV.
Rufinus and Jerome refer to " Due Vie"' only, and it is certain that if this refers to the Latin Didache, it refers only to Did. I-V, our De Doctrina.
It is very probable that the latter part of the Didache, with its out-of-date Church order of doubtful orthodoxy, would soon be omitted, especially if the object of the translator or adapter were to make a homily, as is the case with the Latin Didache and the Panegyric of Schnudt.
The second half of the Didache is so well attested in the various versions and extracts, and there is absolute certainty that it is the Didache's "' Two Ways "' which is used in the other documents referred to in the chapters on the text and literary relationships of the Didache, that we must assume that those who use only the " Two
Ways" do so not because they know the " Two Ways" only, but because they appreciate these chapters only, and not the Church order.
They prefer the Didache's '' Two Ways "' to Barnabas's because of its better order and superior arrangement.
The literary evidence for the authenticity of Didache I, 3b-II, 1 has been demonstrated above.
In the case of III, 1-6, too, although the style is different from that of the rest of the '' Two Ways" and although the Oxyrhynchus
Papyrus'marks a division between II, 7 and III, 1, the use of this passage in the other documents using the " Two
Ways" makes it certain that this too is an authentic part of the original Didache.
Canon Streeter holds that this sarly attestation does not in any way prove the authenticity of the '' Interpolation.""
On pages 29, 33, 40, etc., we have 1 Cf. p. 67 supra, where the Michigan Papyrus of Hermas is referred to.
THE RIDDLE OF THE DIDACHE
referred to his main arguments in favour of his theory that Did. I, 30-II, 1 is an interpolation.
To support his theory he makes use in the Primitive Church, Appendix C, and in J.Th.S., 1936, of an analogy.
The end of the Gospel of _ §S. Mark is, we know, spurious, being founded on the Gospels of Matthew, Luke and John, the writers of which used the true
Mark.
The spurious ending was, however, accepted as authentic from the time of Irenzeus.
Similarly, says Streeter, the "Interpolation" in the Didache was accepted as authentic as early as the time of the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus and the Apostolic Constitutions, but it is evidently spurious, for it is based on Hermas and Barnabas, which are not used elsewhere by the Didache.
Matthew and Luke do not know the end of Mark, nor do the Latin Didache, the Apostolic Church Order or Schnudi know the " Interpolation."
This analogy is a very great support for Canon Streeter's theory.
A passage could be accepted as authentic at a very early date and yet not be authentic.
However, there are one or two matters which to my mind weaken the support :
(x) the sources of the end of Mark are different from those of the rest of the Gospel, while the sources of the "' Interpolation' are, I think, those of the rest of the Didache, (2) the style of the end of Mark differs from that of the rest of the Gospel, while the style of the Didache is uniform, and (3) there is evidence for the existence of the " Interpolation " at the time of the Didascalia.
Moreover, whatever support this analogy may give, it is useless, for Canon Streeter does not consider that the later documents which use the Didache not only may, but certainly did have reasons for omitting the " Interpolation,' as we have already seen.
Even when they omit, they sometimes incidentally betray knowledge of the passage.
These two things seem to me to prove beyond doubt that the Didache as we have it in Bryennius's MS. is a unity just as it was written by its original author.
The reasons are that the sources of the Didache are the same throughout, and that the language of the Didache is the same throughout.
To this may be added the fact that the spirit of the Didache is the same all through.